Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

U.S. steps up support for foreign democracies

Speaker Nancy Pelosi, at Taipei Songshan Airport in Taiwan.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi, at Taipei Songshan Airport in Taiwan.

Even though American democracy continues to face challenges from within and is on the decline, according to various studies, national leaders are continuing their efforts to support democracy abroad.

Within the past week, officials took steps to support the governments of Taiwan and Ukraine despite pressure from China and Russia to stay out of their respective neighborhoods. These actions, which garnered bipartisan support, stand in stark contrast to the polarizing battles over election administration, voting rights and investigations of the former president.


Tensions between Taiwan, China and the United States ratcheted up after Speaker Nancy Pelosi visited the island on Aug. 3, becoming the highest ranked U.S. official to visit Taiwan in 25 years.

China claims Taiwan is a part of its territory while other countries, including the United States, believe it to be independent. The Taiwanese people have their own democratic government and a capitalist economy, a sharp juxtaposition from China’s communist system.

Pelosi’s visit has been labeled by some as “reckless and provocative” by some, although she defended the trip as a symbol of U.S. solidarity with, and support for, Taiwan, arguing that her “visit should be seen as an unequivocal statement that America stands with Taiwan, our democratic partner, as it defends itself and its freedom.”

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

China has threatened to unify Taiwan with the mainland using its military authority many times in the past several decades. The threat has taken on a whole new meaning following China’s crackdown on pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong in 2019. In the few years that have passed, more people have taken China’s warning to heart, especially Taiwanese people and the United States.

Pelosi’s visit came at a time where China’s authoritarian tactics have become increase, with the government censoring journalists, limiting free speech, spreading misinformation, and seemingly committing human rights violations in Hong Kong and through the Uyghur genocide.

China has retaliated against the speaker’s visit by firing several missiles into the waters surrounding Taiwan and launching large-scale military drills around the island on Thursday. In their attempts to further deepen the divide between the mainland and the US, Beijing officials announced that they were ending cooperation with the United States on topics including climate change and military issues.

However, the conflict has created some unity among Democrats and Republicans. Several lawmakers from both parties urged Pelosi to carry out her plan to visit Taiwan in the face of China’s threats. The chairman of the Senate GOP’s campaign committee, Rick Scott of Florida, said: “I think it’s important that we go over there and tell Taiwan that they are an important democratic ally. We ought to be clear there is no ambiguity that we will support them if they get invaded by communist China.”

Several Democrats echoed this sentiment. “Nobody should not go someplace because the Chinese government — which is guilty of genocide — is speaking in threatening terms,” said Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts.

Pelosi also claimed that China’s Communist Party is a threat to democracy and drew parallels between the Taiwan-China conflict and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, writing: “I conveyed to President Volodymyr Zelensky that we admired his people’s defense of democracy for Ukraine and for democracy worldwide.”

And on Monday, the Pentagon announced it would be sending another $1 billion worth of military equipment to Ukraine, to further its defense against the ongoing Russian invasion. That brings the total financial support for Ukraine, since the invasion began, to approximately $9 billion. And in general, both parties have been supportive of U.S. efforts to help Ukraine push back against authoritarian Russia.

However, here at home, democracy has seen better days. According to the most recent Freedom House report, countries under democratic rule have been declining over the past 16 years; with authoritarianism on the rise. And the United States continues to drop in the rankings. More broadly, 38 percent of the world’s countries are considered to be “not free” or under some sort of undemocratic government compared to only 20 percent of the countries that are considered “free.”

Continued aggression from China and Russia will determine the future of democracy in Taiwan and Ukraine.

According to Freedom House, “democratic governments need to strengthen domestic laws and institutions while taking bold, coordinated action to support the struggle for democracy around the world.”

While the United States has made conscious efforts to show political support for Taiwan by rallying behind the island, it has not made substantial changes in actual foreign policies that uphold democracy abroad. The Biden administration has continually aided authoritarian militaries — like Saudi Arabia — despite publicly denouncing their decision to send airstrikes that killed civilians in March 2022.

Read More

When Power Protects Predators: How U.S. Rape Culture Silences Survivors

Individuals protesting.

Gabrielle Chalk

When Power Protects Predators: How U.S. Rape Culture Silences Survivors

On November 5, 2024—the night of the most anticipated election cycle for residents of the United States—thousands gathered around the country, sitting with friends in front of large-screen TVs, optimistic and ready to witness the election of the next president of the United States.

As the hours of election night stretched on and digital state maps turned red or blue with each counted ballot, every 68 seconds a woman was sexually assaulted in the U.S., an estimate calculated by the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network (RAINN).

Keep ReadingShow less
The Bureaucrat’s Dilemma When Dealing with a Charismatic Autocrat

A single pawn separated from a group of pawns.

Canva Images

The Bureaucrat’s Dilemma When Dealing with a Charismatic Autocrat

Excerpt from To Stop a Tyrant by Ira Chaleff

In my book To Stop a Tyrant, I identify five types of a political leader’s followers. Given the importance of access in politics, I range these from the more distant to the closest. In the middle are bureaucrats. No political leader can accomplish anything without a cadre of bureaucrats to implement their vision and policies. Custom, culture and law establish boundaries for a bureaucrat’s freedom of action. At times, these constraints must be balanced with moral considerations. The following excerpt discusses ways in which bureaucrats need to thread this needle.

Keep ReadingShow less
Trump’s Project 2025 agenda caps decades-long resistance to 20th century progressive reform

There has long been a tug-of-war over White House plans to make government more liberal or more conservative.

Getty Images, zimmytws

Trump’s Project 2025 agenda caps decades-long resistance to 20th century progressive reform

Project 2025 is a conservative guideline for reforming government and policymaking during the second Trump administration. The Fulcrum's cross-partisan analysis of Project 2025 relies on unbiased, critical thinking, reexamines outdated assumptions, and uses reason, scientific evidence, and data in analyzing and critiquing Project 2025. To that end, we also amplify the work of others in doing the same.

For much of the 20th century, efforts to remake government were driven by a progressive desire to make the government work for regular Americans, including the New Deal and the Great Society reforms.

Keep ReadingShow less
Religious elite can follow their source of moral guidance

An open book at a community gathering.

Canva

Religious elite can follow their source of moral guidance

In some societies, there is no distinction between religious elites and political elites. In others, there is a strong wall between them. Either way, they tend to have direct access to huge swaths of the populace and influence with them. This is an irresistible target for the proto-tyrant to court or nullify.

In many cases, the shrewd proto-tyrant will pose as befriending the major religious sect or, at least, dissemble that they mean it no harm. It is extremely enticing for the leaders of these sects to give the proto-tyrant public support or, at least, studiously refrain from criticizing their regime. There is apparently much to be gained or, at least, much less to lose in terms of their temporal power and ability to continue serving their faithful.

Keep ReadingShow less