When President William Lai (賴清德) assumed office in May last year, questions arose about the future of former president Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) signature foreign policy, the New Southbound Policy (NSP). While Lai pledged to continue the NSP during his campaign, his administration has sent mixed signals, particularly as the opposition-controlled legislature slashes government budgets across the board. The one-year postponement of the Yushan Forum — the nation’s annual regional dialogue that has long served as a cornerstone of NSP outreach — only deepened concerns about the government’s commitment to the policy.
However, Lai addressed these doubts during his speech at this year’s forum. He highlighted the achievements of the original NSP and laid out his administration’s vision for the New Southbound Policy Plus (NSP+), a revamped approach that not only continues engagement with partners in South and Southeast Asia, but also broadens its scope to the wider Indo-Pacific region. Lai does not just intend to maintain the NSP; he plans to expand its scale and hence its strategic relevance on the global stage.
Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation chairman Michael Hsiao (蕭新煌) explained that the NSP+ would focus on six strategic “corridors.” These include three government-led initiatives, namely the “technology,” the “health” and the “resilience” corridors. Civil society would drive the other three, namely the “think tank,” the “non-governmental [NGO] organization,” and the “youth” corridors.
These corridor strategies mark a notable shift from the original NSP. Under Tsai, the NSP functioned primarily as an instrument of economic statecraft, aimed at reducing Taiwan’s economic dependence on China, while fostering closer ties with partner countries in the region.
Lai’s NSP+ not only deepens engagement, but positions Taiwan as a regional hub for partners and like-minded countries to cooperate through the new corridors.
The groundwork to establish these corridors was already being laid during Tsai’s presidency: Taiwan and the Philippines conducted multiple joint training for firefighters, an early example of the resilience corridor; the Taiwan Alliance in International Development offered fellowships that brought NGO professionals from partner countries to Taiwan, which might be a look into the NGO corridor; and in the health sector, Taiwan implemented a “One Country, One Center” initiative to deepen medical cooperation and provide capacity for partner countries. In addition, Taiwan has implemented programs inviting youth leaders from partner countries to Taiwan for exchange and leadership training.
These efforts are just a few examples of initiatives that already align with the new corridor strategies. The real challenge lies in how to effectively integrate these programs into a cohesive NSP+ framework.
The term “corridor” typically denotes a passageway from A to B. In the context of the NSP+, it could be reimagined as a “bridge,” not just linking Taiwan with its partner countries, but also fostering cooperation among the partners themselves. Taiwan would serve as a hub to facilitate meaningful, multilateral collaboration across the region.
However, there are challenges. First, Taiwan’s ambition to act as a hub might be limited by diplomatic isolation. While the original NSP made meaningful strides in strengthening people-to-people ties, Taiwan still struggles with limited diplomatic recognition on the global stage. Since Tsai took office, multiple former allies have cut ties with Taipei.
Second, Taiwan faces steep competition. In many Southeast Asian countries, China maintains a strong presence, not only through government engagement, but also as a major source of funding for local NGOs and think tanks. This financial influence could create hesitation to build closer ties with Taiwan, especially when doing so might risk jeopardizing relationships with Chinese counterparts or donors.
Patrick Kurniawan is a Ministry of Foreign Affairs Taiwan fellow at the Center for Southeast Asian Studies, National Chengchi University; and science and technology fellow at the Center for Business and Diplomatic Studies, Binus University.
Minister of Labor Hung Sun-han (洪申翰) on April 9 said that the first group of Indian workers could arrive as early as this year as part of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Taipei Economic and Cultural Center in India and the India Taipei Association. Signed in February 2024, the MOU stipulates that Taipei would decide the number of migrant workers and which industries would employ them, while New Delhi would manage recruitment and training. Employment would be governed by the laws of both countries. Months after its signing, the two sides agreed that 1,000 migrant workers from India would
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
Japan’s imminent easing of arms export rules has sparked strong interest from Warsaw to Manila, Reuters reporting found, as US President Donald Trump wavers on security commitments to allies, and the wars in Iran and Ukraine strain US weapons supplies. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s ruling party approved the changes this week as she tries to invigorate the pacifist country’s military industrial base. Her government would formally adopt the new rules as soon as this month, three Japanese government officials told Reuters. Despite largely isolating itself from global arms markets since World War II, Japan spends enough on its own
On March 31, the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs released declassified diplomatic records from 1995 that drew wide domestic media attention. One revelation stood out: North Korea had once raised the possibility of diplomatic relations with Taiwan. In a meeting with visiting Chinese officials in May 1995, as then-Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) prepared for a visit to South Korea, North Korean officials objected to Beijing’s growing ties with Seoul and raised Taiwan directly. According to the newly released records, North Korean officials asked why Pyongyang should refrain from developing relations with Taiwan while China and South Korea were expanding high-level