President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present.
From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That paradigm only began to shift in the early 20th century.
After World War I, leaders began to establish rules to restrain acts of war, but it was not until the end of World War II that the efforts took meaninful shape. Behind this, one fact cannot be ignored: the comprehensive involvement of the US in fundamentally altering the global situation.
The US not only defeated the fascist forces, but also promoted the founding of the UN and established the Bretton Woods system, creating global trade rules and a global security framework.
The process was not driven by idealism alone, but by a combination of US strength, interests and values. In international relations theory, this is referred to as the “Pax Americana”: world order brought by US soft and hard power.
This international order is not perfect, but it has indeed maintained relative peace for nearly 80 years. However, some public opinion in Taiwan takes the opposite view, seeing the US as the source of conflict — an opinion that lacks historical perspective and ignores the harsh realities of geopolitics. Indeed, the US is not infallible, but without the US-led order, could Western Europe have escaped the shadow of the Soviet Union? Could Taiwan enjoy today’s freedom and democracy? Probably not.
The value of peace is often invisible, just as we cannot count how many crimes the police have prevented before they happened, but it is precisely this kind of structural security guarantee that allows us to live our daily lives without war. For Taiwan, such “structural protection” is especially crucial.
Ironically, it is because Taiwan exists within this protection that public opinion can criticize the US without concern. If we do not understand where this protection comes from, it would be difficult to make the right strategic choices when facing risks.
Today, strong isolationist voices have emerged within the US. A return to isolationism would undoubtedly affect the US’ commitments to its allies. For Taiwan, this is not just a matter of “someone else’s politics,” but a real security issue. If the US steps back from its regional role, is Taiwan prepared to face an Asia increasingly dominated by major powers?
History has shown many times that when a leading and benign power retreats, the world order easily descends into chaos. Taiwan, as a small nation on the front line of geopolitics, should see this reality clearly, strengthen cooperation with democratic countries, and reinforce institutional resilience and self-defense capabilities.
Today’s international order is not a given, but is the result of a major power’s willingness to take responsibility.
While we cannot choose our geographic location, we can choose where we stand. Let us not wait until the order collapses to begin missing the seemingly “flawed” peace.
Simon Tang is an adjunct professor at California State University, Fullerton, who lectures on international relations.
Chinese state-owned companies COSCO Shipping Corporation and China Merchants have a 30 percent stake in Kaohsiung Port’s Kao Ming Container Terminal (Terminal No. 6) and COSCO leases Berths 65 and 66. It is extremely dangerous to allow Chinese companies or state-owned companies to operate critical infrastructure. Deterrence theorists are familiar with the concepts of deterrence “by punishment” and “by denial.” Deterrence by punishment threatens an aggressor with prohibitive costs (like retaliation or sanctions) that outweigh the benefits of their action, while deterrence by denial aims to make an attack so difficult that it becomes pointless. Elbridge Colby, currently serving as the Under
The Ministry of the Interior on Thursday last week said it ordered Internet service providers to block access to Chinese social media platform Xiaohongshu (小紅書, also known as RedNote in English) for a year, citing security risks and more than 1,700 alleged fraud cases on the platform since last year. The order took effect immediately, abruptly affecting more than 3 million users in Taiwan, and sparked discussions among politicians, online influencers and the public. The platform is often described as China’s version of Instagram or Pinterest, combining visual social media with e-commerce, and its users are predominantly young urban women,
Most Hong Kongers ignored the elections for its Legislative Council (LegCo) in 2021 and did so once again on Sunday. Unlike in 2021, moderate democrats who pledged their allegiance to Beijing were absent from the ballots this year. The electoral system overhaul is apparent revenge by Beijing for the democracy movement. On Sunday, the Hong Kong “patriots-only” election of the LegCo had a record-low turnout in the five geographical constituencies, with only 1.3 million people casting their ballots on the only seats that most Hong Kongers are eligible to vote for. Blank and invalid votes were up 50 percent from the previous
Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi lit a fuse the moment she declared that trouble for Taiwan means trouble for Japan. Beijing roared, Tokyo braced and like a plot twist nobody expected that early in the story, US President Donald Trump suddenly picked up the phone to talk to her. For a man who normally prefers to keep Asia guessing, the move itself was striking. What followed was even more intriguing. No one outside the room knows the exact phrasing, the tone or the diplomatic eyebrow raises exchanged, but the broad takeaway circulating among people familiar with the call was this: Trump did
RSS