The past few years have served as a lesson to expect the unexpected. Despite expert warnings about the inevitability of a global pandemic, COVID-19 still caught the world unawares. Russia’s attack on Ukraine seemed to send us collectively careening further out of control, as few dared to believe that a hot war in Europe was likely. Now with Hamas and Israel locked in a brutal conflict, it is beginning to feel like none of the world’s flashpoints are to remain cool for long — Taiwan leading the list.
If this portrayal resonates with you, you would not be alone. Even before Hamas’ attack, the idea of a “polycrisis” was beginning to gain traction. Attendees of the World Economic Forum in Davos earlier this year favored the term coined in the 1970s to describe the interaction between disparate crises “such that the overall impact far exceeds the sum of each part.” Global anxieties were already trained on Taiwan, but with large-scale conflicts now raging in Palestine as well as Ukraine, a cross-strait conflict seems many times more likely than before.
Media have locked on to the concern, asking US officials how Washington is to handle the compounding crises. US President Joe Biden on Friday last week countered with a US$105 billion ask from Congress that combines aid for Israel and Ukraine. It also includes US$2 billion for Taiwan and Indo-Pacific security, bundling two conflicts with efforts to deter another, thereby inadvertently lending credence to the public expectation of conflict. In Taipei last week, American Institute in Taiwan Chair Laura Rosenberger also assured Taiwan that US support would not be affected amid fears of taut resources.
As tempting as it is to view global conflict as an inevitable collective, a flare-up in one place does not necessitate a total conflagration. Each actor has their own set of desires, concerns and cost-benefit analyses, Beijing included. It appears to be positioning itself carefully.
After Hamas’ attack on Oct. 7, Beijing has remained self-consciously neutral, declining to condemn Hamas as the aggressor and instead calling on “all relevant parties to remain calm, exercise restraint and immediately end the hostilities.” State media also said that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has offered to broker talks on a two-state solution. It is only the latest of China’s efforts to establish itself as a global mediator, after in March brokering a deal between Saudi Arabia and Iran, and on multiple occasions throwing its name in the ring as an option to facilitate talks between Russia and Ukraine.
In global politics, Beijing wishes to present itself as a great power alternative to the US. To do so, it needs to be viewed as a sober and reasonable actor that speaks on behalf of countries that have been ignored and condemned by those calling the shots until now. Playing by the rules while bending them to its wishes is how China has gotten this far, and there appears to be no immediate reason why it should change its playbook by starting a divisive conflict.
It is also important to remember that China itself is not a monolith. Al-Jazeera in an article published on Friday stressed that even within China’s military, not everyone believes the West to be the primary enemy, nor does everyone think the country should be “preparing for future conflicts that it might not win.” Xi has inadvertently confirmed this sentiment by instituting indoctrination campaigns and removing key leaders — including former Chinese minister of national defense Li Shangfu (李尚福) — which the reporter’s sources said they do not think are fully working. As much as Xi is trying to consolidate his power, it appears he still has a ways to go.
From what is known about Xi and his ambitions, everyone recognizes the causes for worry, but little is said about the causes for restraint. As the “polycrisis” feels more salient than ever, it is important to remember that no crisis is inevitable with the right preparation and balance.
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