Taiwan is widely regarded to be a vibrant democracy in East Asia. However, its think tank ecosystem still has room to grow, especially in terms of strengthening the foundations of democratic resilience.
At the Yushan Forum this year, several speakers, including James Gomez of the Asia Centre and Tristan Liu (呂曜志) of Taiwan Thinktank, said that Taiwan’s think tanks often maintain strong connections with the government, both financially and institutionally. This close relationship might contribute to relatively uniform policy discussions, and limit Taiwan’s flexibility and visibility in international policy communities.
While this arrangement reflects Taiwan’s historical and political context, it also underscores the importance of rethinking how think tanks operate in a democratic society.
Think tanks are not only providers of technical expertise. They help render public opinion more informed and professionally grounded. A robust think tank ecosystem contributes to public discourse, broadens the range of policy options and enhances transparency in governance. The institutional structure and developmental path of think tanks influence the overall quality of democratic governance, not just policy outcomes.
In Taiwan’s case, the need for strong, independent and globally connected think tanks is especially urgent. As authoritarian regimes increasingly engage in disinformation and historical revisionism, Taiwan must be prepared to defend its narratives with clarity and credibility.
For instance, during a May 8 meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), Russian President Vladimir Putin emphasized the two countries’ shared stance against “neo-Nazism.” While Taiwan was not named directly, this rhetoric echoes the kind of ideological framing used to justify the invasion of Ukraine, and has appeared over the past few months in Chinese-language disinformation targeting Taiwan.
To strengthen Taiwan’s democratic resilience, the first imperative is to strengthen public recognition and the institutional role of think tanks. Compared with the US, home to one of the most mature think tank ecosystems, with more than 2,200 registered think tanks in 2020, Taiwan’s think tanks are not yet widely seen as central pillars of democratic life. Public awareness of their functions, such as providing expert knowledge to inform policy or amplifying diverse voices, is still relatively limited.
Policymaking remains highly centralized, and think tanks often play a supplementary, rather than formative, role in policy development. Under such conditions, cultivating a robust think tank ecosystem akin to that of the US, which is based on strong demand, is inherently challenging.
To address this, the government could engage more systematically with a wider range of think tanks, including those from civil society, to incorporate their insights into policymaking processes. At the same time, in today’s polarized society, where many commentators argue that the media is a key driver of division, it is also a timely opportunity to strengthen think tanks as trustworthy sources of public knowledge. By increasing their influence and visibility, think tanks can enhance public understanding of their roles and gradually build recognition of their importance in democratic governance.
Second, funding mechanisms and institutional capacity could be improved. As noted by the Taiwan Competitiveness Forum in 2017, unhealthy competition resulting from limited funding channels can compromise research independence. Rather than simply reducing state funding, Taiwan might diversify the types of government-commissioned projects available, making them more open.
Meanwhile, a fair and transparent evaluation system should also be developed to guide funding allocation, not only to reduce alignment incentives between think tanks and government, thereby enhancing their operational independence, but also to signal institutional quality to domestic and international stakeholders.
Third, the government could explore tax incentives, including deductible donations from individuals, or baseline funding to think tanks that meet transparency and performance standards.
It is essential to enhance collaboration among think tanks in democratic countries. While facing narrative challenges, think tanks can offer more flexible and credible platforms than official spokespeople. They could participate in international forums, publish in respected journals, engage foreign media and monitor cognitive operations. Moreover, it is essential to recognize that authoritarianism does not target Taiwan alone, but the broader rules-based international order. In this context, deepening international collaboration is not just desirable, but imperative.
As Taiwan considers the next phase of the New Southbound Policy, think tanks should jointly create strategic frameworks with regional counterparts. This means not only responding to external narratives, but shaping them, offering alternative visions rooted in democratic values and regional solidarity. Such cooperation would help safeguard the resilience of Taiwan and the region’s democratic institutions.
In sum, as global uncertainties intensify, the demand for analysis and recommendations across a wide range of domains, including international relations, defense, economic security and semiconductors, is expected to rise significantly. This trend would likely elevate the visibility and importance of think tanks. Seizing this moment to establish a comprehensive and healthy think tank ecosystem could bring substantial and lasting benefits not only to Taiwan’s democratic resilience, but also to a peaceful and prosperous Indo-Pacific region.
Kuo Ruei is a political worker with experience in international affairs.
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) concludes his fourth visit to China since leaving office, Taiwan finds itself once again trapped in a familiar cycle of political theater. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has criticized Ma’s participation in the Straits Forum as “dancing with Beijing,” while the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) defends it as an act of constitutional diplomacy. Both sides miss a crucial point: The real question is not whether Ma’s visit helps or hurts Taiwan — it is why Taiwan lacks a sophisticated, multi-track approach to one of the most complex geopolitical relationships in the world. The disagreement reduces Taiwan’s
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is visiting China, where he is addressed in a few ways, but never as a former president. On Sunday, he attended the Straits Forum in Xiamen, not as a former president of Taiwan, but as a former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairman. There, he met with Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference Chairman Wang Huning (王滬寧). Presumably, Wang at least would have been aware that Ma had once been president, and yet he did not mention that fact, referring to him only as “Mr Ma Ying-jeou.” Perhaps the apparent oversight was not intended to convey a lack of
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) last week announced that the KMT was launching “Operation Patriot” in response to an unprecedented massive campaign to recall 31 KMT legislators. However, his action has also raised questions and doubts: Are these so-called “patriots” pledging allegiance to the country or to the party? While all KMT-proposed campaigns to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmakers have failed, and a growing number of local KMT chapter personnel have been indicted for allegedly forging petition signatures, media reports said that at least 26 recall motions against KMT legislators have passed the second signature threshold
RSS