As someone who has closely studied and written about India–Taiwan relations, I have witnessed a quiet, but meaningful transformation in the partnership. What began with the establishment of the Taipei Economic and Cultural Center (TECC) and the India Taipei Association (ITA) in 1995 — modest steps underpinned by mutual caution — has evolved into a more visible and forward-leaning engagement. Thirty years on, this is a milestone that merits not only reflection, but renewed ambition.
Bilateral ties have acquired steady and substantive momentum. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs recently issued a rare and unequivocal statement supporting India’s right to defend its national security, a striking gesture that reflects how Taipei now perceives its relationship with New Delhi. India, too, has extended timely support, following the Hualien train tragedy and amid China’s military posturing after then-US House of Representatives speaker Nancy Pelosi’s 2022 visit.
These expressions of solidarity are not incidental. They reflect a deliberate broadening of engagement, shaped by converging strategic interests and a shared commitment to democratic values, open economies and regional stability. Yet, despite these developments, the India-Taiwan relationship remains conspicuously understudied and underarticulated in both nations’ foreign policy narratives.
In the broader Indo-Pacific context, where economic interdependence, technological competitiveness and geopolitical contestation converge, India and Taiwan are natural partners, but their partnership remains largely ad hoc, without the institutional scaffolding it requires. The 30th anniversary of TECC and ITA should not be treated as a ceremonial marker, but as an inflection point to articulate a bolder vision.
What should this next phase of engagement entail?
First, reconnect the skies. Direct flights between Taipei and New Delhi are long overdue. Governments and airlines alike must look beyond short-term profits to unlock the enormous potential in business, education and people-to-people ties. It is astounding that this simple, yet powerful step remains unrealized.
Second, reinvigorating semi-political dialogue. Parliamentary exchanges, once pursued sporadically, have long remained dormant. Reviving the India-Taiwan Parliamentary Friendship Association could help enhance mutual understanding and reduce political hesitancy. While informal, such initiatives generate momentum in policy spaces where formal diplomacy cannot operate.
Third, institutionalizing cooperation in emerging domains. Cybersecurity, disinformation and advanced technologies are areas where Taiwan has proven capabilities. India, having been subject to increasingly sophisticated cyberintrusions and influence campaigns, would benefit from structured dialogue and knowledge sharing. A dialogue between senior officials from the two foreign ministries could be an effective starting point.
Fourth, deepening collaboration in the semiconductor sector. With the approval of the HCL–Foxconn joint venture, India’s first fabrication unit in Uttar Pradesh, Taiwan’s role in India’s semiconductor ambitions is becoming tangible. However, investment must be paired with long-term planning, including joint training programs, research initiatives and curriculum development to build a skilled workforce.
Fifth, strengthening public awareness and knowledge production. In Taiwan, understanding of India continues to rely heavily on Western media, while in India, Taiwan is still often viewed through the restrictive lens of the “one China policy.” This gap in mutual comprehension is not abstract, I have experienced it personally. During my own academic training, Taiwan was taught not as a vibrant democracy with its own identity and agency, but merely as a China-related issue. It was only through direct engagement and lived experience that I came to understand Taiwan on its own terms.
This underscores why greater academic collaboration is not just desirable, but necessary. Dedicated Taiwan and India studies programs, language exchanges and long-term visiting academic initiatives must be prioritized. Universities in both nations should move beyond symbolic engagement to invest in sustained intellectual partnerships. Only then can we cultivate a new generation of academics, diplomats and practitioners who see each other not through borrowed narratives, but through informed, grounded perspectives.
India and Taiwan are powers navigating a region marked by increasing volatility. They face assertive neighbors, economic coercion and the constant threat of strategic escalation. Unlike other regional actors, they have no diplomatic buffer or “exit” from these tensions; they must contend directly with the China challenge. In this context, silence or inertia is no longer a viable policy choice.
The 30th anniversary of TECC and ITA is not just a moment to commemorate; it is a strategic opportunity to reimagine the future of India-Taiwan relations. This requires more than cautious optimism. It demands policy clarity, public articulation and a proactive road map for cooperation across sectors.
India-Taiwan ties have come a long way, but the path ahead remains open. Whether this anniversary becomes a turning point or a missed opportunity would depend on the choices both sides are willing to make now.
Sana Hashmi is a fellow at the Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation.
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls. That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed
RSS