Typhoon Doksuri hit China’s southeastern provinces late last month and made its way north to Hebei Province. Severe flooding wreaked havoc on hundreds of towns in Hebei, washing away vehicles and bridges, destroying roads, and engulfing businesses, homes and farmland. Chinese state media on Friday said at least 29 people had died, while 16 were missing and more than 1.75 million people had been relocated. Direct economic losses were initially estimated at about US$13.2 billion.
Meanwhile, in the wake of Typhoon Khanun, heavy rain fell on the mountainous areas of central and southern Taiwan on Saturday last week. Data from the Central Weather Bureau showed that 1,051mm of rain fell on Nantou County’s Renai Township (仁愛) over 72 hours. Aside from serious flooding, dozens of people in mountain villages were temporarily stranded as roads were cut off by landslides. In Renai, a gas station was buried by a landslide, and part of the foundations of a hotel were washed away, while many roads are still covered in mud. The Ministry of Agriculture estimated that the agricultural losses in Nantou from Typhoon Khanun were about NT$167.56 million (US$5.27 million).
While the floods in Taiwan and China occurred just a few days apart, people from both countries have posted online about the stark differences in disaster response measures. This highlights the difference between how the authoritarian government in China and the democratic government in Taiwan value the lives of their people.
Chinese state media reported that Hebei officials on July 31 opened floodgates and spillways in seven low-lying flood control zones, to divert floodwater and prevent rivers and reservoirs from overflowing into Beijing and Tianjin. Consequently, the city of Zhuozhou and surrounding farmlands were submerged. Zhuozhou residents said that they did not receive government warning, and a local newspaper reported that outside rescue teams needed to obtain an “invitation letter” from local authorities before it could enter the city and take action.
Chinese state media on Thursday last week reported that Hebei Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Secretary Ni Yuefeng (倪岳峰) ordered the activation of flood diversion measures, saying the flooded areas would “resolutely serve as a ‘moat’ for the capital.”
President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) and Vice President William Lai (賴清德) on Tuesday last week expressed their condolences to victims of the disaster in China in posts on X, formerly known as Twitter. Tsai on Saturday last week ordered military personnel and top Cabinet officials to reinforce rescue efforts in Nantou, and she visited flood-hit areas on Tuesday.
In contrast, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Chinese Premier Li Qiang (李強) remain absent from the flood scene, while foreign media reported that Xi and top CCP leaders are believed to have started their annual vacation at the Beidaihe seaside resort, which is in Hebei, but was not affected by the floods. From Saturday last week, Chinese state media started publishing long propaganda reports touting Xi’s “strong and powerful” response to the severe floods in Beijing, saying that he had given important instructions regarding flood prevention and rescue measures early last month.
While the stark difference between the two governments’ disaster response measures can be seen in multiple credible media reports, there was still disinformation spreading on online forums last week, including a post with a photograph of Tsai on a military vehicle visiting flooded areas in Chiayi County in 2018 alongside a photograph of late Chinese leader Jiang Zemin (江澤民) walking in floodwater.
Taiwanese people must remain aware of Chinese propaganda in its many forms, including false disaster news, which is only expected to increase before the presidential and legislative elections in January next year.
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
RSS