Rumors that Taiwan has nuclear, biological and chemical weapons, all secretly hidden away, have plagued journalists for a decade. Wild gossip includes Taiwan's acquisition of two nuclear weapons from either Russia or South Africa, depending on the story. Other stories include the storage of sarin nerve gas at two sites in Taiwan. Biological-weapons rumors include everything from Anthrax to Ebola.
It takes about 300kg of sarin to kill 60 to 100 people, but only 30kg of anthrax spores to kill 30,000 to 100,000 people.
The advantages of the latter are obvious. Biological weapons leave cities untouched but wipe out the population. Chemical weapons require massive clean-up operations and pollute the environment for decades. Nuclear weapons simply achieve both -- the utter destruction of both population and cities. The price tag for biological weapons production is much lower than nuclear and, given its lethality compared to chemicals, much more attractive.
A 1993 US Congressional Office of Technology Assessment listed Taiwan as "possibly" having an "undeclared offensive BW [biological-weapons] program." An equally unnerving report was issued in July 1998 by the US Arms Control and Disarmament Agency which noted that Taiwan had upgraded its biotechnology capabilities by purchasing sophisticated biotechnology equipment from the US and Switzerland, but concluded that evidence was not sufficient to determine if Taiwan is engaged in biological-weapons activities.
A 1997 Russian Federation Foreign Intelligence Service report stated that Taiwan did not have biological weapons, but has "shown signs of conducting biological research of an applied military nature." A recent Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) report, Perspectives on Biological Weapons Proliferation, stated Taiwan was suspected of "mounting an offensive biological weapons program."
Local media picked up the CSIS report and further alleged that Taiwan had developed 36 types of bacteria for biological weapons. But the CSIS report never mentioned this allegation.
The development of biological weapons, according to specialists, would require only US$100,000, five trained biologists and a few weeks to produce enough weapons to wipe out a large city. For example, 35 grams of botulinal toxin could kill 60 million people.
According to the Center for Nonproliferation Studies, Taiwan is listed as having a "possible research program" in biological weapons, and is a "probable" possessor of chemical agents.
At the end of World War II Taiwan's military took possession of a Japanese chemical weapons facility in northern Taiwan, and is believed to have expanded the facility in light of the threat from China. Taiwan is rumored to house sarin at two locations: Tsishan, Kaohsiung County and Kuanhsi, Hsinchu County.
Though Taiwan has researched and developed anti-chemical and anti-biological warfare equipment in response to threats from China, the government maintains that it will not pursue nuclear, biological and chemical warfare capabilities.
Taiwan signed and ratified both the 1925 Geneva Protocol and the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention. However, it has not signed the Chemical Weapons Convention, and this is often excused due to Taiwan's quasi-diplomatic position, which does not allow it to sign as a nation-state.
Despite denials and accusations, the nuclear, biological and chemical-weapons question will continue to haunt Taiwan. Though weapons of mass destruction are more often depicted in movies than in real life, they nonetheless exist in today's world. Who has them answers the question of who might use them.
Wendell Minnick is a correspondent with Jane's Defence Weekly in Taiwan.
Donald Trump’s return to the White House has offered Taiwan a paradoxical mix of reassurance and risk. Trump’s visceral hostility toward China could reinforce deterrence in the Taiwan Strait. Yet his disdain for alliances and penchant for transactional bargaining threaten to erode what Taiwan needs most: a reliable US commitment. Taiwan’s security depends less on US power than on US reliability, but Trump is undermining the latter. Deterrence without credibility is a hollow shield. Trump’s China policy in his second term has oscillated wildly between confrontation and conciliation. One day, he threatens Beijing with “massive” tariffs and calls China America’s “greatest geopolitical
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) made the astonishing assertion during an interview with Germany’s Deutsche Welle, published on Friday last week, that Russian President Vladimir Putin is not a dictator. She also essentially absolved Putin of blame for initiating the war in Ukraine. Commentators have since listed the reasons that Cheng’s assertion was not only absurd, but bordered on dangerous. Her claim is certainly absurd to the extent that there is no need to discuss the substance of it: It would be far more useful to assess what drove her to make the point and stick so
The central bank has launched a redesign of the New Taiwan dollar banknotes, prompting questions from Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — “Are we not promoting digital payments? Why spend NT$5 billion on a redesign?” Many assume that cash will disappear in the digital age, but they forget that it represents the ultimate trust in the system. Banknotes do not become obsolete, they do not crash, they cannot be frozen and they leave no record of transactions. They remain the cleanest means of exchange in a free society. In a fully digitized world, every purchase, donation and action leaves behind data.
The Honduran elections seem to have put China on defense. The promises of trade and aid have failed to materialize, industries are frustrated, and leading candidate Salvador Nasralla, who has increased his lead in the polls, has caused Beijing to engage in a surge of activity that appears more like damage control than partnership building. As Nasralla’s momentum has grown, China’s diplomacy, which seems to be dormant since the establishment of diplomatic relations in 2023, has shown several attempts to avoid a reversal if the Liberal or the National party — which also favor Taipei — emerge as winners in the
RSS