Debates in Taiwan over the clash between former US President Donald Trump and Harvard University have generated no shortage of commentary, analysis and emotion. As a US citizen observing from a distance, I fully understand the desire to engage with developments in the US. However, I would caution against allowing such distant controversies to dominate the public discourse in Taiwan, especially given the far more pressing challenges closer to home.
The issues in the US — polarization, institutional credibility and elite accountability — are real, but so is the US’ capacity to confront them. With a population of more than 330 million, a GDP exceeding US$27 trillion and an unmatched network of global alliances, the US is built to withstand internal crises. Its geographic size, diversity and layered democratic institutions give it the strategic depth to self-correct. Criticism from overseas, no matter how well-intentioned, is unlikely to shape its domestic evolution.
Taiwan’s situation is markedly different. It is a small, exposed democracy confronting an existential threat from one of the world’s most powerful authoritarian regimes. The Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) pressure campaign extends beyond military threats to include economic coercion, political infiltration and cognitive warfare. Unlike the US, Taiwan lacks the luxury of distraction.
While criticism of institutions such as Harvard might reflect valid concerns, it risks diverting attention from urgent national imperatives. These include investing more significantly in national defense — potentially more than 5 percent of GDP — accelerating asymmetric warfare capabilities, countering CCP influence operations and bolstering democratic resilience from within.
From the outside looking in, Taiwan faces a critical strategic moment. The focus of its intellectual, political and civil society communities would be better directed at fortifying the nation’s sovereignty and preparing for contingencies that could define its future.
Just as the US’ challenges must be resolved by Americans, similarly, Taiwan’s problems can only be addressed by Taiwanese themselves.
The US would continue to debate and resolve its internal issues in its own time and way. However, Taiwan cannot afford to misplace its priorities. The stakes are too high, the threats too real and the timeline too uncertain.
Simon Tang is an adjunct professor at California State University, Fullerton, who lectures on international relations.
The cancelation this week of President William Lai’s (賴清德) state visit to Eswatini, after the Seychelles, Madagascar and Mauritius revoked overflight permits under Chinese pressure, is one more measure of Taiwan’s shrinking executive diplomatic space. Another channel that deserves attention keeps growing while the first contracts. For several years now, Taipei has been one of Europe’s busiest legislative destinations. Where presidents and foreign ministers cannot land, parliamentarians do — and they do it in rising numbers. The Italian parliament opened the year with its largest bipartisan delegation to Taiwan to date: six Italian deputies and one senator, drawn from six
Recently, Taipei’s streets have been plagued by the bizarre sight of rats running rampant and the city government’s countermeasures have devolved into an anti-intellectual farce. The Taipei Parks and Street Lights Office has attempted to eradicate rats by filling their burrows with polyurethane foam, seeming to believe that rats could not simply dig another path out. Meanwhile, as the nation’s capital slowly deteriorates into a rat hive, the Taipei Department of Environmental Protection has proudly pointed to the increase in the number of poisoned rats reported in February and March as a sign of success. When confronted with public concerns over young
Taiwan and India are important partners, yet this reality is increasingly being overshadowed in current debates. At a time when Taiwan-India relations are at a crossroads, with clear potential for deeper engagement and cooperation, the labor agreement signed in February 2024 has become a source of friction. The proposal to bring in 1,000 migrant workers from India is already facing significant resistance, with a petition calling for its “indefinite suspension” garnering more than 40,000 signatures. What should have been a straightforward and practical step forward has instead become controversial. The agreement had the potential to serve as a milestone in
China has long given assurances that it would not interfere in free access to the global commons. As one Ministry of Defense spokesperson put it in 2024, “the Chinese side always respects the freedom of navigation and overflight entitled to countries under international law.” Although these reassurances have always been disingenuous, China’s recent actions display a blatant disregard for these principles. Countries that care about civilian air safety should take note. In April, President Lai Ching-te (賴清德) canceled a planned trip to Eswatini for the 40th anniversary of King Mswati III’s coronation and the 58th anniversary of bilateral diplomatic
RSS