This year, two countries have been thrust into the global spotlight: Finland, which on Tuesday last week became the 31st member of NATO, and Taiwan, which again became the center of attention as President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), on behalf of the Taiwanese public, held a joint news conference alongside US House of Representatives Speaker Kevin McCarthy in California, in what was another sign of growing ties between Taipei and Washington.
For the entirety of last year, pundits drew parallels between Taiwan and Ukraine, and such prevailing trends of international relations remain relatively unchanged. In view of the ongoing war in Ukraine, Finland has made a historic decision in ditching its long-held policy toward Russia since World War II in a bid to safeguard its national security and sovereignty.
The invasion of Ukraine has intensified global concerns about Taiwan, which has long faced the threat of Chinese aggression. As Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) secured a third term in office, China has only increased its coercion and intimidation against Taiwan.
In response, the Democratic Progressive Party has been compelled to seek a way out by deepening ties and normalizing high-level bilateral interaction with the US despite China’s ire.
There has been a major shift in the global community, but people might not be able to pinpoint the precise reason behind it.
The underlying cause for the shift in the US-China relationship has gone from strategic cooperation to rivalry to opposition.
With the closing of the “two sessions,” Xi visited Russia and vowed to solidify a “strategic partnership of coordination” between the countries.
The world is entering a bipolar system involving two opposing values and systems — a crossroad at which democracies and autocracies inevitably collide.
Russian President Vladimir Putin and Xi are the main aggressors intent on upsetting global realities.
With this context in mind, people would have less trouble understanding the major political and geopolitical shift for the past decade. As countries started taking sides, the democratic camp had every reason to support an ally in need.
After being noted for decades as a neutral presence, Finland gave up on its neutrality and joined the US and its NATO allies in exchange for security. If Sweden could lay Turkey’s objections to rest, then it could follow Finland into becoming a new member of NATO.
The timeline has suggested that NATO’s eastward expansion cannot be regarded as justification for Ukraine’s invasion as Putin has claimed, but it was the consequences that caused it. These small nations were compelled to take a side for fear of what Putin did and might do next.
Like Ukraine, people might also easily see Taiwan in Finland’s example, as all three are threatened by bellicose neighbors. As Taiwan has explored various solutions over the years, it has adopted a policy akin to “Finlandization” as well, especially when it was hit by the first wave of China’s ascent to power.
During former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) term in office from 2008 to 2016, Taiwan also exerted appeasement, restraint and self-censorship on its politics, economy and culture, which US academics consider to be classic traits of “Finlandization of Taiwan.” Ma’s recent visit to China and so-called “peacemaking” measures promoted by others are similarly in line with such a policy.
However, Finland has had a rude awakening.
Tsai’s meeting with McCarthy at a news conference on Wednesday last week drew nearly 200 journalists from around the world, enough to see the significance of the event in global media. Taiwan’s global status owes a lot to Xi’s oppression.
Taipei can adopt any model, but cannot afford to repeat Finland’s playbook of being subservient to a bigger country.
If Taiwan decides to seek independence, then as “one who is virtuous,” it “shall not stand alone” by having diplomatic ties with other nations. Any Taiwanese president would have to adopt this model if they wish to lead a democratic nation on the right path.
Tzou Jiing-wen is editor-in-chief of the Liberty Times (the sister newspaper of the Taipei Times.
Translated by Rita Wang
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long been expansionist and contemptuous of international law. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the CCP regime has become more despotic, coercive and punitive. As part of its strategy to annex Taiwan, Beijing has sought to erase the island democracy’s international identity by bribing countries to sever diplomatic ties with Taipei. One by one, China has peeled away Taiwan’s remaining diplomatic partners, leaving just 12 countries (mostly small developing states) and the Vatican recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign nation. Taiwan’s formal international space has shrunk dramatically. Yet even as Beijing has scored diplomatic successes, its overreach
In her article in Foreign Affairs, “A Perfect Storm for Taiwan in 2026?,” Yun Sun (孫韻), director of the China program at the Stimson Center in Washington, said that the US has grown indifferent to Taiwan, contending that, since it has long been the fear of US intervention — and the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) inability to prevail against US forces — that has deterred China from using force against Taiwan, this perceived indifference from the US could lead China to conclude that a window of opportunity for a Taiwan invasion has opened this year. Most notably, she observes that
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
Since being re-elected, US President Donald Trump has consistently taken concrete action to counter China and to safeguard the interests of the US and other democratic nations. The attacks on Iran, the earlier capture of deposed of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and efforts to remove Chinese influence from the Panama Canal all demonstrate that, as tensions with Beijing intensify, Washington has adopted a hardline stance aimed at weakening its power. Iran and Venezuela are important allies and major oil suppliers of China, and the US has effectively decapitated both. The US has continuously strengthened its military presence in the Philippines. Japanese Prime