Having annexed the Sudetenland in October 1938, Nazi Germany went on to take over the whole of Czechoslovakia in March 1939. Then-British prime minister Neville Chamberlain on March 31 declared that if Germany attacked Poland, Britain would feel bound to lend Poland all the support within its power, and an Anglo-Polish agreement was signed on the same day.
On Sept. 1, 1939, Germany did invade Poland, and the UK declared war on Germany two days later.
However, Britain’s “support” was only to fight the relatively weak German navy in the Atlantic, rather than opening the more important Baltic Sea route. Poland soon became an occupied state and was partitioned under the Treaty of Non-Aggression between Germany and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, otherwise known as the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact.
Returning to the present, on Jan. 15, historian Niall Ferguson delivered an online keynote speech at a forum organized by the Taipei School of Economics and Political Science. Ferguson is a senior fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, a former professor of history at Harvard University, New York University and the London School of Economics and Political Science, and a former senior research fellow at the University of Oxford.
In 2004, he was named as one of Time magazine’s 100 most influential people, and his opinions on foreign policy are widely respected.
In his speech, Ferguson said that although the US has over the past three or four years repeatedly amplified its spoken promises to Taiwan, they might not have the desired effect, and it is risky to only rely on spoken pledges.
What happened to Poland in 1939 shows that even when there is a concrete commitment, or a specific signed agreement, it is just as risky as when there is only a verbal commitment, and perhaps more so. With verbal commitments, people still have some sense of uncertainty about the future. This heightens anxiety, leading them to act decisively and appropriately in the face of an immediate threat.
The Yom Kippur War waged by Egypt and Syria against Israel in October 1973 showed that when an enemy begins a war, a country can only rely on itself. Despite initial setbacks, Israel had a strong will to fight and reservists who were promptly deployed to stop its enemies’ advances.
Fortified by an urgent supply of weapons from the US, Israel emerged victorious.
A poll conducted early last month by CommonWealth Magazine found that 63.7 percent of respondents said they were not worried that there would be a war between Taiwan and China in the coming year, while 57.9 percent did not think that China would try to unite with Taiwan by force.
Nearly 60 percent thought that the US would send its armed forces to save Taiwan, and 54 percent thought that the US military could effectively protect Taiwan.
Nearly 60 percent of young people aged 20 to 29 did not reject bringing back military conscription, while 70 percent of all respondents were in favor of it.
Evidently, although people in Taiwan are optimistic about the US coming to their aid in a time of war, they, like the Israelis, are aware of the principle of helping oneself before expecting help from others as they feel uncertain about the future.
At a time when a consensus about bringing back military conscription is gradually forming, Taiwan should initiate the preparations and measures necessary as soon as possible.
To do so would demonstrate the nation’s determination to defend itself, just as a report this month describing navy marines training at the Zuoying Naval Base in Kaohsiung showed the world Taiwan’s willingness to fight.
Sung Chi-cheng is an assistant professor at Shih Hsin University’s Center for General Education and a former colonel instructor at National Defense University’s War College.
Translated by Julian Clegg
In 1976, the Gang of Four was ousted. The Gang of Four was a leftist political group comprising Chinese Communist Party (CCP) members: Jiang Qing (江青), its leading figure and Mao Zedong’s (毛澤東) last wife; Zhang Chunqiao (張春橋); Yao Wenyuan (姚文元); and Wang Hongwen (王洪文). The four wielded supreme power during the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976), but when Mao died, they were overthrown and charged with crimes against China in what was in essence a political coup of the right against the left. The same type of thing might be happening again as the CCP has expelled nine top generals. Rather than a
Former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmaker Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) on Saturday won the party’s chairperson election with 65,122 votes, or 50.15 percent of the votes, becoming the second woman in the seat and the first to have switched allegiance from the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) to the KMT. Cheng, running for the top KMT position for the first time, had been termed a “dark horse,” while the biggest contender was former Taipei mayor Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌), considered by many to represent the party’s establishment elite. Hau also has substantial experience in government and in the KMT. Cheng joined the Wild Lily Student
The US Senate’s passage of the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which urges Taiwan’s inclusion in the Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) exercise and allocates US$1 billion in military aid, marks yet another milestone in Washington’s growing support for Taipei. On paper, it reflects the steadiness of US commitment, but beneath this show of solidarity lies contradiction. While the US Congress builds a stable, bipartisan architecture of deterrence, US President Donald Trump repeatedly undercuts it through erratic decisions and transactional diplomacy. This dissonance not only weakens the US’ credibility abroad — it also fractures public trust within Taiwan. For decades,
When Taiwan High Speed Rail Corp (THSRC) announced the implementation of a new “quiet carriage” policy across all train cars on Sept. 22, I — a classroom teacher who frequently takes the high-speed rail — was filled with anticipation. The days of passengers videoconferencing as if there were no one else on the train, playing videos at full volume or speaking loudly without regard for others finally seemed numbered. However, this battle for silence was lost after less than one month. Faced with emotional guilt from infants and anxious parents, THSRC caved and retreated. However, official high-speed rail data have long