After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists.
The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India to safeguard national security and fight terrorist forces that cross borders to attack innocent civilians.”
Following the statement, Indian social media users expressed appreciation for Taiwan, calling for further deepening and strengthening of the relationship between Taipei and New Delhi.
Prominent author and scientist Anand Ranganathan on X expressed his thoughts on Taiwan’s statement. “China does not recognise Kashmir as part of India. China has usurped 38000 sq km of Kashmir. China supports Pakistan on Kashmir,” Ranganathan wrote.
“Despite this, India does not have diplomatic relations with Taiwan. India does not even recognise Taiwan as a country. Time has come to correct this,” he added.
Ranganathan’s statement had more than 530,000 views, 40,000 likes and more than 9,700 reposts. Some users urged the Indian government to recognize Taiwan.
As the ministry’s statement triggered an important discussion on Indian social media, it is important to analyze why Taiwan made that statement and what it implies for Taiwan-India relations.
First, Taiwan communicated to New Delhi that it is sensitive to India’s national security concerns. By doing so, it set a stage for reciprocation. In case of an event concerning Taiwan’s national security, it would want India to be sensitive to its concerns, too.
Second, Taiwan accepted that terrorism is a national security risk, and it is a country’s “legitimate” right to take “necessary actions” to “fight terrorist forces that cross borders to attack innocent civilians.”
That is particularly important, because Taiwan clearly stated that terrorist forces came from across the border. By saying so, Taipei stood valiantly against Pakistan’s and China’s narrative, and acknowledged that terrorism is backed from across the border.
Third, the persistent threat to Taiwan’s national security comes from across the Taiwan Strait from the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Taiwan and India share the CCP threat — India faces threats from across its disputed borders with China. By saying that “MOFA will continue to pay close attention to developments between India and Pakistan and engage in joint efforts to ensure peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific,” Taiwan stated that India-Pakistan tensions is a problem of the Indo-Pacific region. By saying so it sought reciprocation on the issue of threat to its national security as an Indo-pacific paradigm.
Finally, by highlighting India as a “democratic partner,” Taipei communicated that its association with New Delhi is long term and is based on shared commitment to democracy which ideologically is opposed to Chinese communism. Through the statement, Taiwan asserted its political identity and sought sensitivity to its geopolitical concerns.
Venus Upadhayaya is a Ministry of Foreign Affairs Taiwan fellow from India.
When US budget carrier Southwest Airlines last week announced a new partnership with China Airlines, Southwest’s social media were filled with comments from travelers excited by the new opportunity to visit China. Of course, China Airlines is not based in China, but in Taiwan, and the new partnership connects Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport with 30 cities across the US. At a time when China is increasing efforts on all fronts to falsely label Taiwan as “China” in all arenas, Taiwan does itself no favors by having its flagship carrier named China Airlines. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is eager to jump at
The muting of the line “I’m from Taiwan” (我台灣來欸), sung in Hoklo (commonly known as Taiwanese), during a performance at the closing ceremony of the World Masters Games in New Taipei City on May 31 has sparked a public outcry. The lyric from the well-known song All Eyes on Me (世界都看見) — originally written and performed by Taiwanese hip-hop group Nine One One (玖壹壹) — was muted twice, while the subtitles on the screen showed an alternate line, “we come here together” (阮作伙來欸), which was not sung. The song, performed at the ceremony by a cheerleading group, was the theme
Secretary of State Marco Rubio raised eyebrows recently when he declared the era of American unipolarity over. He described America’s unrivaled dominance of the international system as an anomaly that was created by the collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War. Now, he observed, the United States was returning to a more multipolar world where there are great powers in different parts of the planet. He pointed to China and Russia, as well as “rogue states like Iran and North Korea” as examples of countries the United States must contend with. This all begs the question:
In China, competition is fierce, and in many cases suppliers do not get paid on time. Rather than improving, the situation appears to be deteriorating. BYD Co, the world’s largest electric vehicle manufacturer by production volume, has gained notoriety for its harsh treatment of suppliers, raising concerns about the long-term sustainability. The case also highlights the decline of China’s business environment, and the growing risk of a cascading wave of corporate failures. BYD generally does not follow China’s Negotiable Instruments Law when settling payments with suppliers. Instead the company has created its own proprietary supply chain finance system called the “D-chain,” through which
RSS