Taiwan’s most pressing threat is the rest of the world’s lack of awareness of Taiwan.
Mainstream English coverage of Taiwan suffers the same problem as many countries that are outside the “trending” news cycle by being presented as consequential to broader tensions between “big powers” like the US and China. This has been particularly true this year, with vital stories involving Taiwan oversimplified by major international platforms.
Ironically, a broader international understanding of Taiwan is key to demonstrating that these “big power” narratives are never as simple as propaganda or the 24-hour news cycle would suggest. Given the ongoing protests in Hong Kong, it seems important to note the Taiwanese government has long stated its willingness to formulate alternative extradition arrangements that would enable Chan Tong-kai (陳同佳) — accused of murdering his girlfriend Poon Hiu-wing (潘曉穎) in Taiwan and fleeing back to Hong Kong — to stand trial in Taiwan without pursuing the now-withdrawn extradition bill that would have allowed extradition of Hong Kong citizens to China.
Rolling coverage of activity on the ground by mainstream English-language platforms, alongside demonization of protesters by Chinese Communist Party (CCP)-controlled outlets like CGTN, have clouded much awareness of this.
Coverage of Taiwan’s Indigenous Historical Justice and Transitional Justice Committee’s response to Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) Jan. 2 speech on the CCP’s willingness to achieve control of Taiwan by any means necessary offered an important refute of the CCP’s antiquated Han-centric nationalist narrative of political authority by virtue of race from Taiwan’s Aboriginal community.
English translations of the response were available only in specialized Taiwanese news outlets such as the max Taipei Times, a situation desperately needing improvement when much of the world is not even aware of Taiwan’s Aboriginal peoples.
Equally concerning is the absence of investigating CCP motives towards Taiwan, as seen in the coverage of the CCP’s banning of individual travel to Taiwan. Setting aside the lack of discussion that individuals are harder to track than the still-permitted group tours and business travelers, or CCP anxiety over Chinese citizens having interactions with Taiwanese away from its control, the move was characterized by CNN and the BBC as a worsening of cross-strait relations on the part of Taiwan due to President Tsai Ying-wen’s (蔡英文) visit to New York, and US arms sales, respectively. Only Bloomberg made the effort to consider as a motive the CCP’s desire to influence Taiwan’s presidential election next year.
These examples point to the same problem. Quality coverage that prevents misunderstandings about Taiwan and “big power” narratives is plentiful, but difficult for English-language audiences to access. It relies on readers seeking to understand Taiwan, an unreasonable expectation for the average person with little interest or knowledge of Taiwan to begin with.
One solution may be to emphasize the broader risks of catering to sensationalist political posturing and economic comparison at the expense of comprehensive reporting.
Considering the dual concern of political apathy and factionalism within English-speaking countries, proper coverage of Taiwan may offer an effective start to solving both problems.
Max Lembke-Soh is a history and Taiwan studies graduate from SOAS, University of London.
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US