How Russian Telegram Framed Taiwan’s Elections and Sovereignty
Levi Bochantin, Researcher, Doublethink Lab
A shorter version of this report was published on The Diplomat in March 2024.
Taiwan’s national elections on January 13th led to a clear victory for the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)’s presidential candidate, Lai Ching-Te, but a split legislature. According to a preliminary report from Doublethink Lab’s election observation, Taiwan was the target of frequent information operations that likely stemmed from the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in the lead-up to the election. Particularly, the PRC amplified existing stories that exacerbated internal conflict within Taiwan, such as alleged scandals of DPP politicians, and fabricated stories closer to election day.
The Taiwanese elections were not only the focus of PRC-affiliated accounts; it was also a major topic in several pro-Kremlin Russian Telegram groups. This report set out to investigate how the Taiwanese elections were discussed by Russian Telegram users with a substantial following. Although Taiwan is seemingly a fleeting thought of Russia, who has decided to wage an unjustified war against Ukraine for nearly 2 years, this report finds that the Taiwanese elections were used by pro-Kremlin users to question the sovereignty of Taiwan. Moreover, the rebuttal from Taiwan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) to the Russian Foreign Ministry’s post-election statement sparked anger among Russian users and further backlash against Taiwanese sovereignty.
Methodology
This report conducted a thematic analysis to investigate some of the narratives circulating among widely-viewed Russian Telegram accounts. Telegram is a widely used social media app in Russia that allows users to join groups, subscribe to users, post text and media, and interact with others. Accounts of interest were primarily those that provided news and commentary on China-related issues with a sizable following (i.e., over 10,000 subscribers), although some did not focus solely on China. Many of the accounts were identified thanks to a large Telegram database previously compiled by our partners at Mantis Analytics. Selected posts on the election were those viewed by over 10,000 users on Telegram and posted on or shortly after election day (i.e., January 13th to 15th). Thereafter, Doublethink Lab coded the posts to identify key themes and narratives across the users. Specifically, coding was used to determine the actors, heroes, victims, villains, and pawns, as framed by the user. A further analysis of the coding led to identifying three key themes across the posts, all of which fuelled a broader deep narrative.
Limitations
One major limitation of this preliminary analysis is that it likely only scratched the surface of Russian Telegram discussions surrounding the Taiwanese elections. Approximately 15 widely viewed posts were analyzed from only a handful of highly active and high-profile users on Telegram, most of which were identified using the aforementioned database. Due to the small sample size, further long-term analysis is needed to compile a codebook and conduct a thorough investigation of Russian Telegram narratives. We hope to fill this gap in the future by conducting a larger analysis on the question of Taiwanese sovereignty in such Telegram channels. Moreover, this analysis only reviewed posts made on or shortly after election day. Therefore, any additional commentary made in the months leading up to the inauguration of the new legislators and president and vice president have not been analyzed.
DPP vs. KMT, or the “Americans” vs. the “Chinese”
One of the most common themes among election posts was equating the DPP with Americans and the Kuomintang (KMT) with Chinese. One prominent Russian China commentator, Nikolai Vavilov, who has approximately 150,000 subscribers on his Telegram account, drew one such parallel in his post-election analysis by saying that “the triumvirate — both ‘Americans’ and ‘Chinese’ achieved equal results and the third party — the ‘populists’ — became the ‘key’ to any decision in parliament.” Thus, Vavilov establishes the connection between parties and the superpower he suggests is backing them rather directly — the DPP are the “Americans” and the KMT are the “Chinese.”
It should be noted that Vavilov styles himself as an authoritative voice on Chinese affairs in the Russian language space. He frequently appears as a commentator on Russian news broadcasts, such as the far-right Tsargrad TV network and the state broadcaster Rossiya 1. Vavilov also has a YouTube channel of over 200,000 subscribers, to which he frequently uploads videos on recent events in and around China, many of which are reposted segments from other networks that he appeared on. For example, as recently as January 17, 2024, Vavilov posted a segment in which he was a guest speaker on Tsargrad TV, which has been banned from YouTube since July 2020.
Moreover, Vavilov portrays the DPP as the real instigator of hostilities between China and Taiwan. He insinuates that the Taiwanese government are the actors that would make an aggressive move against China that would require retaliation. Particularly, he suggests that the DPP aspires to change the constitution to enshrine Taiwan’s independence as law. He writes that the DPP is “likely to further arm the island, demonize Beijing, and create a mobilization base.” Vavilov also mentions the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), the third party in the election that ran on a platform of being neither of the two major parties. The party, which won 8 seats in the Legislative Yuan, will be crucial in any future coalition-building, as both the DPP and KMT failed to receive over 50% of the seats. Vavilov argues that the DPP’s goals of declaring independence would not occur unless the TPP, or the “populists,” are met with external influence, presumably from the United States. Of course, Vavilov’s entire hypothesis that the DPP would change the constitution if given a majority in the Legislative Yuan falls flat, given that the DPP has held control of the Presidency and Legislature for the last 8 years.
In a post that received over 28,000 views, one user suggested that China must “negotiate” with people living in Miaoli County, a region that votes predominantly for the KMT, so that a “quiet beach landing” can occur in the event of an amphibious invasion. The post is interesting as it not only connects the KMT as being a pro-China party, but also suggests that the user has a rather significant knowledge of Taiwanese politics as Miaoli County is often regarded as a KMT stronghold. The user, a self declared expert in Chinese militarism, Russian-Chinese relations, and conflict in the Asia-Pacific region, makes frequent posts in support of the People’s Liberation Army.
Overall, observed Telegram accounts frequently describe the DPP and KMT as being the “American” party and “Chinese” party, respectively. These oversimplified labels send the message that Taiwan is not in control of its own destiny; its existence is only permitted by the two superpowers with interests in the Taiwan Strait.
The United States as a provocateur
Another prominent theme throughout many Telegram posts is the role that the United States plays in the region, particularly as an instigator of conflict. A win for the DPP is framed as a continuation of American weapons and military infrastructure being provided to Taiwan, and the outcome of war in the Taiwan Strait is considered inevitable due to America’s actions. One popular account with over 800,000 subscribers, that of military and political analyst Boris Rozhin, frequently spreads narratives of US interference in Ukraine and the Asia-Pacific. Although he normally reports on Russia’s war in Ukraine, he has also created widely circulated posts on Taiwan in the past. Following the Taiwanese election, he acknowledged that the “pro-American” candidate (i.e., Lai Ching-te) won and suggested that the likelihood of war had increased. In another post, he stated that the DPP’s electoral victory “means that the US maintains control” over the ability to start a war against China, as well as claimed that the victory signals more aggressive actions from the US against China in the coming years through official US visits to Taiwan, military provocations, and “information-diplomatic attacks.”
America’s supposed role in cross-strait tensions was also exemplified through memes. One user insinuated that the election was a battle between American and Chinese puppets by posting an image of Uncle Sam and a panda at odds with one another behind a puppet show. Underneath the post was the caption, “In the recent Taiwanese elections, Uncle Sam pulled the strings more effectively.”
On another Telegram account, a user shared a mock front-page story in English satirizing the New York Times with the headline, “CIA Wins Taiwan Elections,” which stated that Lai Ching-te won the election “despite more people (60%) voting against him.” The mock story also featured a picture of Lai and National Endowment for Democracy CEO Damon Wilson (misspelled in the post as “MacWilson”), with the caption describing the organization as a “CIA spin-off.”
Such memes fuel the narrative that conflict in the Taiwan Strait is a proxy conflict between the United States and China, with the former leveraging Taiwan for its own geopolitical benefit. The election results also provided an opportunity for pro-Kremlin users to take shots at the United States’ foreign policy and institutions. The meme also pointed to another significant theme across Russian Telegram posts — questioning the validity of the election itself.
Questioning of Taiwan’s democratic elections
It’s no secret that Russian influence operations heavily target elections and sow distrust in countries’ democratic systems. Telegram accounts observed in this analysis similarly honed in on Taiwan’s democratic process, primarily by targeting the election results. As previously mentioned, Taiwan’s 2024 elections were unique in that they fielded a strong third party candidate, the TPP’s Ko Wen-je, the former Taipei City mayor. The TPP garnered a significant share of the votes in the election by attracting voters who were frustrated with the incumbent DPP and the longstanding KMT. Because Taiwan’s presidential elections have no run-off and candidates only require a plurality of the votes to win, votes against the DPP were divided between the KMT and TPP, leading to the DPP’s Lai Ching-te winning with just over 40% of the votes.
The elections were immediately targeted to draw attention to the supposedly unfair results. For example, users would highlight Lai’s 40% victory to emphasize that the majority of Taiwanese people are actually in favor of closer ties with China. Such assertions drastically oversimplify the views of voters from all parties, particularly those of TPP supporters, who often do not align with the KMT’s stances toward China. Such posts turned into a numbers game; not only would users mention Lai’s less-than-50% victory, but also factor in voter turnout. One user proposed that Lai actually won 29% of the vote after factoring in the voter turnout. They go on to ask whether people will think that CNN, the private American media outlet, would write about the “so-called legitimacy of the so-called winner, for whom essentially 29% [of the population] voted, only slightly more than a quarter of the country’s residents.”
Interestingly, the same user posted a video from the Taiwanese media outlet UDN the following day on a minor election-day controversy. According to CNA, roughly 100 residents of Taiwan’s Kinmen Island were stranded at Taipei Songshan Airport after being told that the Ministry of National Defense (MND) would provide them with free air transport back to the island to vote. However, due to miscommunication between the Civil Aviation Administration and the MND, air transport could not be provided to the voters to return to their precinct in time. In the Telegram post, the UDN video consisted of interviews with stranded Kinmen residents expressing their anger with the authorities. Using the video as justification (and without translating it for the audience), the user suggested that the government cut off flights to the island to prevent the “80%” of KMT supporters on the island from voting. Moreover, they insinuated that “democratic methods of influencing an election are such a thing.” CNA reported that the army could not conduct the flight as military personnel were limited to allow for other service members to vote. Nonetheless, this Telegram post amplifying election interference narratives by the Taiwanese government reached over 26,000 users.
MOFA’s response to the Russian Foreign Ministry draws ire from Russian users
After the election, Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova responded to a question from the press regarding Russia’s position towards Taiwan. In her response, Zakharova reiterated that Russia acknowledges Taiwan as “an inalienable part of China” and that attempts to use the election to “pressure Beijing and destabilize the situation in the strait…must be condemned.” In response, Taiwan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a response condemning Russia’s claims and stating that “Russia has willingly become an accomplice of the Chinese Communist Party regime.”
As recently reported by Ukraine Crisis Media Center, the sudden rebuttal from Taiwan’s MOFA ignited fierce comments from pro-Kremlin Telegram accounts. In one long-winded post, a user, who seems to be a research associate at a Russian university, described MOFA’s rebuke as hypocritical and described Taiwan’s de facto independence as being purely a result of intervention from the United States in the 1950s. Moreover, Russia is painted as a victim of the West who is simply stating their official policy position, one that, the user must point out, is also that of the United States. Parallels between US involvement in Ukraine are also drawn, as Russia is also painted as the victim who has been dealing with the “consequences for almost two years now.” Users responded in another similar post by suggesting that “Taiwan is a puppet of the United States” and that the United States “uses Taiwan to destabilize the region — somewhat like Ukraine 2.0.”
Conclusion
This preliminary analysis revealed that Russian Telegram has decidedly not remained silent on the fate of Taiwan’s political future. The way that Taiwanese political parties are framed by online users and the events surrounding the election fuel a deep narrative that questions Taiwan’s sovereignty. First, any political successes of the DPP and the KMT were political successes for the United States and China, respectively. Although this framing implies that China is also pulling the strings of Taiwan, it frames Taiwan as being simply an island fought over by two superpowers. Second, the election results were used to further antagonize the United States and draw parallels between US involvement in Taiwan and Ukraine. The United States was described as retaining “control” over the presidency of Taiwan with Lai Ching-te’s victory and being able to initiate a war against China at a moment’s notice. Users conflated such “control” over the Taiwan Strait with narratives that the United States was supposedly the actor that triggered Russia’s war on Ukraine. Finally, Russian accounts honed in on the alleged shortcomings of the democratic process in Taiwan in an attempt to downplay the outcomes. This was done primarily through emphasizing Lai Ching-te’s election results, that is, emphasizing that the majority of Taiwanese voters voted against the DPP and must therefore be in support of stronger ties with China.
