The end of Pope Francis’ papacy presents not just a ceremonial moment for the Catholic Church, but a pivotal opportunity for communities that have long valued the church’s moral voice in global affairs.
Among them is Taiwan, whose enduring relationship with the Holy See has carried profound symbolic significance. As the world awaits the election of the next Bishop of Rome, there is a growing awareness that the Vatican’s choices — especially regarding its commitments to democratic values and human dignity — would deeply shape not only the church’s global standing, but also the hopes of those who look to it for principled leadership.
Pope Francis had emphasized compassion and outreach, especially toward those who are marginalized. He embodied a vision of the church as a place of refuge, marked by gestures of mercy and humility. Yet his tenure also revealed the limits of goodwill when confronting regimes unwilling to reciprocate.
His repeated efforts to establish deeper ties with China, including a controversial agreement on bishop appointments, were intended to open new pathways for faith in a hostile environment. Instead, they often seemed to yield unilateral concessions, with little improvement in the situation for underground Catholics in China.
For Taiwan, that history is not merely instructive — it is urgent. The Vatican remains one of Taiwan’s few formal diplomatic allies, a relationship nurtured through decades of shared values such as human dignity, religious freedom and resilience against authoritarian pressure. Yet recent trends suggest that the next pope would face strong incentives to deepen engagement with Beijing, even if that means downgrading or abandoning ties with Taipei.
China’s consistent diplomatic strategy has been to demand exclusive recognition, pressuring other countries to sever official relations with Taiwan. There is no reason to believe it would treat the Holy See differently.
Some said that rapprochement with China would allow the Vatican greater access to the millions of Catholics living under communist rule. That argument, while understandable in pastoral terms, risks overlooking a deeper principle: The Catholic Church’s moral authority comes not from the number of faithful it reaches, but from the integrity with which it stands by those faithful.
Taiwan’s democracy, respect for religious liberty and history of peaceful engagement with the world are not bargaining chips to be exchanged for uncertain diplomatic gains.
It needs a pope who would understand that genuine outreach does not mean sacrificing the vulnerable or compromising on fundamental rights. It needs a leader who views global diplomacy not through the narrow lens of access or appearances, but through the wider moral horizon the church is meant to represent. Fidelity to principle must outweigh any temptation to appease authoritarianism under the guise of dialogue.
That is not a call for confrontation or isolation. Dialogue with China would remain important for the Vatican, as it is for the broader international community. However, dialogue must be rooted in truth, not expediency. The next pope must recognize that protecting the Church’s presence in China does not require undermining the church’s credibility elsewhere.
Taiwan’s vibrant democracy, with its flourishing religious and civil society, is a testament to the very values the church claims to uphold.
In an era in which institutions often bend under the weight of political and economic pressure, Taiwan represents a rare example of perseverance without capitulation. The Vatican’s relationship with Taiwan is more than a relic of the Cold War; it is a living symbol of the church’s ability to stand for freedom, dignity and human rights.
As the cardinals gather to elect the next Bishop of Rome, Taiwan hopes they choose someone who is not only a pastor filled with joy, but a leader with the moral clarity and courage to resist the seductions of political convenience. In a world increasingly shaped by cynicism and coercion, the church must not be another institution chasing influence at the cost of its soul.
Taiwan will continue to stand, firm and free, regardless of what happens. It is our hope — and our prayer — that the next pope would choose to stand with us. Not for political gain, but because it is the right thing to do.
Y. Tony Yang is an endowed professor and associate dean at George Washington University.
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
India is not China, and many of its residents fear it never will be. It is hard to imagine a future in which the subcontinent’s manufacturing dominates the world, its foreign investment shapes nations’ destinies, and the challenge of its economic system forces the West to reshape its own policies and principles. However, that is, apparently, what the US administration fears. Speaking in New Delhi last week, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau warned that “we will not make the same mistakes with India that we did with China 20 years ago.” Although he claimed the recently agreed framework
The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) on Wednesday last week announced it is launching investigations into 16 US trading partners, including Taiwan, under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to determine whether they have engaged in unfair trade practices, such as overproduction. A day later, the agency announced a separate Section 301 investigation into 60 economies based on the implementation of measures to prohibit the importation of goods produced with forced labor. Several of Taiwan’s main trading rivals — including China, Japan, South Korea and the EU — also made the US’ investigation list. The announcements come
Taiwan is not invited to the table. It never has been, but this year, with the Philippines holding the ASEAN chair, the question that matters is no longer who gets formally named, it is who becomes structurally indispensable. The “one China” formula continues to do its job. It sets the outer boundary of official diplomatic speech, and no one in the region has a serious interest in openly challenging it. However, beneath the surface, something is thickening. Trade corridors, digital infrastructure, artificial intelligence (AI) cooperation, supply chains, cross-border investment: The connective tissue between Taiwan and ASEAN is quietly and methodically growing
RSS