Sovereignty a daily practice
I read with great interest Teo Hsia’s article (“Taiwan should learn from Canada,” May 6, page 8) comparing Taiwan’s situation with Canada’s. I strongly agree with the core message: Taiwan must stand firm in the face of external pressure.
In recent years, the Chinese Communist Party has persistently attempted to undermine Taiwan through diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, political infiltration and disinformation. These are not merely challenges to the nation’s governance — they are attacks on our sovereignty.
Taiwan is a fully functioning democracy and a sovereign state. We have every right — and responsibility — to resist foreign hostility. However, speeches and slogans alone are not enough. What we need is action: to maintain our unique advantages and shield our strategic assets.
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co represents not just Taiwan’s technological prowess, but a critical piece in global supply chains. The government must act decisively to protect its intellectual property and prevent technology leaks — regardless of whether such actions are politically convenient.
We must ensure that, in a rapidly shifting global environment, Taiwan retains the strategic leverage to protect its people and interests.
Policies that secure our core industries are not acts of provocation — they are acts of preservation. Sovereignty is not just a principle; it is a daily practice.
Lee Yu-kuan
Taoyuan
Taiwan and economic shifts
Last month, US President Donald Trump signed Executive Order No. 14257, imposing a 32 percent “reciprocal” tariff on Taiwanese goods, with the semiconductor industry being the sole exception.
As Taiwan’s export industries have long heavily relied on the US market, this policy delivered a significant blow to the nation’s economy. Traditional manufacturing sectors, electronic components and machinery tools were particularly affected, as their competitiveness weakened, potentially leading to indirect impacts on employment and the survival of small and medium-sized enterprises.
The government refrained from imposing retaliatory tariffs in response. Instead, it proposed strategies such as expanding procurement from the US and negotiating a zero-tariff agreement, demonstrating its hope to resolve the dispute through talks.
To ease tensions, the US and Taiwan held their first substantive tariff negotiations in Washington early this month. These talks covered not only tariff issues, but also non-tariff trade barriers, indicating that both sides are still willing to engage in dialogue and repair their trade relationship.
As a university student about to graduate this year, I cannot help but worry whether this sudden trade conflict would affect my job-seeking process. Will the job market shrink due to pressure on export-oriented enterprises? Will our generation face greater employment challenges?
These concerns have begun to influence and reshape my expectations and plans for the future. What I once learned only from textbooks has now become a tangible source of pressure in daily life, making me realize that global political and economic shifts are no longer distant or abstract — they have real, significant impacts on small, open economies like Taiwan’s.
Overall, although this tariff dispute has brought harm to Taiwan’s economy, it also serves as a valuable international economic education for our generation. It not only reminds us of the importance of paying attention to global developments, but also teaches us to cultivate adaptability and a global perspective.
As the US is one of Taiwan’s largest export markets, any shift in its policies can have profound consequences. I hope the government and education system will strengthen education on international affairs, equipping everyone with the ability to analyze global trends and face future challenges with confidence.
Only by understanding the world can we remain steady and move forward in times of uncertainty.
Sung Yu-fang
Kaohsiung
What began on Feb. 28 as a military campaign against Iran quickly became the largest energy-supply disruption in modern times. Unlike the oil crises of the 1970s, which stemmed from producer-led embargoes, US President Donald Trump is the first leader in modern history to trigger a cascading global energy crisis through direct military action. In the process, Trump has also laid bare Taiwan’s strategic and economic fragilities, offering Beijing a real-time tutorial in how to exploit them. Repairing the damage to Persian Gulf oil and gas infrastructure could take years, suggesting that elevated energy prices are likely to persist. But the most
Taiwan should reject two flawed answers to the Eswatini controversy: that diplomatic allies no longer matter, or that they must be preserved at any cost. The sustainable answer is to maintain formal diplomatic relations while redesigning development relationships around transparency, local ownership and democratic accountability. President William Lai’s (賴清德) canceled trip to Eswatini has elicited two predictable reactions in Taiwan. One camp has argued that the episode proves Taiwan must double down on support for every remaining diplomatic ally, because Beijing is tightening the screws, and formal recognition is too scarce to risk. The other says the opposite: If maintaining
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文), during an interview for the podcast Lanshuan Time (蘭萱時間) released on Monday, said that a US professor had said that she deserved to be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize following her meeting earlier this month with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). Cheng’s “journey of peace” has garnered attention from overseas and from within Taiwan. The latest My Formosa poll, conducted last week after the Cheng-Xi meeting, shows that Cheng’s approval rating is 31.5 percent, up 7.6 percentage points compared with the month before. The same poll showed that 44.5 percent of respondents
India’s semiconductor strategy is undergoing a quiet, but significant, recalibration. With the rollout of India Semiconductor Mission (ISM) 2.0, New Delhi is signaling a shift away from ambition-driven leaps toward a more grounded, capability-led approach rooted in industrial realities and institutional learning. Rather than attempting to enter the most advanced nodes immediately, India has chosen to prioritize mature technologies in the 28-nanometer to 65-nanometer range. That would not be a retreat, but a strategic alignment with domestic capabilities, market demand and global supply chain gaps. The shift carries the imprimatur of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, indicating that the recalibration is