Taiwan is a bastion for LGBTQ+ rights in Asia, and it wears the status proudly. Before the COVID-19 pandemic halted travel, people from across the region would make a pilgrimage to Taipei for its annual Pride parade in October, proudly waving their national flags remixed with the rainbow in a land where they are able to do so freely.
Given this track record, it was an honor when Kaohsiung was chosen to host the ninth WorldPride, a semi-biennial event licensed by InterPride with parades, festivals, conferences and other queer-centric events. With the exception of Jerusalem in 2006, every host city has been in a Western country, which would have made WorldPride Taiwan 2025 the first edition to fully realize the event’s global aspirations.
Yet for an organization whose purpose is to fight for human rights, InterPride has been disappointingly indulgent when it comes to self-determination.
The first sign of trouble came with the winner announcement. What was supposed to be a triumphant moment for Taiwan was undercut by InterPride mistakenly calling the nation a “region,” prompting a tripartite meeting convened by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in November last year to negotiate a correction. At that meeting, the three sides agreed on the name “WorldPride Taiwan 2025.”
Controversy that should have ended there resurfaced during contract negotiations and came to a head on Friday, when the WorldPride 2025 Taiwan Preparation Committee decided to terminate the event. The “final straw” was InterPride’s insistence that the event’s name use “Kaohsiung,” rather than “Taiwan,” suddenly reneging on their agreement. According to the committee, this was after InterPride repeatedly raised doubts as to whether Taiwan could host such a major event, as though the same people have not since 2003 been hosting one of the world’s largest annual Pride celebrations and successfully lobbied to create one of the world’s freest societies for LGBTQ+ people.
In a Facebook comment that is the closest it has come to a public statement on the issue, InterPride said it had suggested using the name “WorldPride Kaohsiung, Taiwan” and were “working with KH Pride to ensure they would deliver the event they promised to our members,” offering a glimpse into the condescending tone hinted at by the committee. An organizer later denied to the Central News Agency that they were ever given that option.
While former WorldPride events were named after the host city, InterPride had already agreed to using “Taiwan” in the name. The committee also justified its decision by citing Taiwan’s own Pride naming convention, which has never used the city name, and other Taiwanese cities’ participation in planned WorldPride events.
The trouble seems to trace back to the UN. During last year’s naming controversy, InterPride in a statement said it had been applying to receive consultative status at the global body and is therefore “aligning with United Nations requirements.”
InterPride is admittedly in a tricky situation. To influence the UN and therefore potentially further LGBTQ+ causes, it must bring itself under China’s influence. Yet it also involves compromising on its core beliefs to appease a government that would never dream of allowing an InterPride event within its borders. Attempting to walk the line has only helped legitimize Beijing’s claims while harming InterPride’s reputation and Taiwan’s LGBTQ+ community in its wake.
Other organizations should heed this lesson: China has carefully designed a strategy toward Taiwan and other human rights issues that bets on democratic participants wanting to find compromise. The only way to avoid falling into its trap is to take a firm and principled stance that refuses to abandon one cause for another.
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) last week announced that the KMT was launching “Operation Patriot” in response to an unprecedented massive campaign to recall 31 KMT legislators. However, his action has also raised questions and doubts: Are these so-called “patriots” pledging allegiance to the country or to the party? While all KMT-proposed campaigns to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmakers have failed, and a growing number of local KMT chapter personnel have been indicted for allegedly forging petition signatures, media reports said that at least 26 recall motions against KMT legislators have passed the second signature threshold
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
The Central Election Commission (CEC) on Friday announced that recall motions targeting 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers and Hsinchu Mayor Ann Kao (高虹安) have been approved, and that a recall vote would take place on July 26. Of the recall motions against 35 KMT legislators, 31 were reviewed by the CEC after they exceeded the second-phase signature thresholds. Twenty-four were approved, five were asked to submit additional signatures to make up for invalid ones and two are still being reviewed. The mass recall vote targeting so many lawmakers at once is unprecedented in Taiwan’s political history. If the KMT loses more
RSS