Former British prime minister Liz Truss on Wednesday called on EU countries and other like-minded nations to form an “economic NATO” as a countermeasure to Chinese economic coercion. Truss also called on the UK and other states to have a clear stance toward China, and not to let the economic benefits it offers cloud the threats it presents to freedom and democracy.
These are two separate issues that Truss has raised — creating economic resilience by reducing reliance on China, and having a clear stance on relations with Taiwan and China — but they are highly connected.
China is well aware that an attempted invasion of Taiwan would most likely draw the US into a larger conflict, which would have fatal consequences for Beijing. Last month, the US was granted access to four more bases in the Philippines: three that are close to Taiwan and one facing the South China Sea. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin on Tuesday said that Washington would send Taiwan military equipment from its stockpile “in the near term” and Japan is installing new missile defense systems in Okinawa Prefecture. Beijing is not likely to risk a war when the odds are stacked so greatly against it. That is why it has been ramping up its cognitive warfare against Taiwan.
Beijing in January lifted a ban on imports of 63 products from Taiwanese food and beverage producers following a visit to China by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) officials. It was seen as a political move aimed at weakening public trust in the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government ahead of next year’s presidential election.
On Sunday, Here I Stand Project deputy secretary-general Cynthia Yang (楊欣慈) told a news conference that after she bought a book critical of the Chinese Communist Party, she received a telephone call telling her that Taiwan would never win a war with China.
These two incidents might seem unrelated, but they are both part of larger efforts by Beijing to manipulate Taiwanese voters, lower public confidence in Taiwan’s military and democratic institutions, and foster ill sentiment toward the US, Japan and other countries friendly toward Taiwan, while bolstering sentiment toward China.
These efforts can be seen online, where China uses fake accounts to post anti-US and anti-DPP diatribes in the comments sections of news stories on social media and on YouTube. This is why it is crucial for countries to have a clear, unambiguous stance on their relationships with Taiwan and China, and their planned courses of action in the event of a Chinese attack. Beijing called Truss’ visit to Taiwan a “dangerous political stunt,” but she was not deterred and said that allowing a totalitarian regime to dictate who goes where “is a very dangerous idea.”
Then-US House of Representatives speaker Nancy Pelosi set a precedent when she visited Taiwan in August last year despite Chinese threats, proving that Beijing was powerless to stop her.
The only real course of action Beijing could take against countries that refuse to succumb to its manipulation is to impose trade barriers and other restrictions on companies that do business in China, which is why, as Truss has clearly articulated, economic resilience is critical. As Beijing employs a divide-and-conquer approach, priming powerful business lobbyists and paying politicians, there must be concerted efforts by governments to assist companies to reduce their operations in China, and clear laws that prohibit trade of some technologies with Beijing.
An alliance of like-minded countries that are clear in their intentions to assist Taiwan will help deter China in its military ambitions, and that clarity of intentions can only be achieved by reducing their economic reliance on China.
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
As the new year dawns, Taiwan faces a range of external uncertainties that could impact the safety and prosperity of its people and reverberate in its politics. Here are a few key questions that could spill over into Taiwan in the year ahead. WILL THE AI BUBBLE POP? The global AI boom supported Taiwan’s significant economic expansion in 2025. Taiwan’s economy grew over 7 percent and set records for exports, imports, and trade surplus. There is a brewing debate among investors about whether the AI boom will carry forward into 2026. Skeptics warn that AI-led global equity markets are overvalued and overleveraged
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should