A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work.
The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and yet, it is a compelling angle, especially for apolitical or undecided citizens.
To be clear, the core reason Taiwan should remain its own country is its distinct identity, political system and, most importantly, its right to self-determination.
However, Chen’s argument could sway those who still believe the two sides of the Taiwan Strait share enough cultural or even economic ties to justify unification. Even if you care only about your wallet and are willing to trade freedom for prosperity, unification would not give you what you hope for.
His argument is that past a certain point, size becomes a liability. The larger a country grows, the more expensive it becomes to govern. You can either maintain efficiency through bloated budgets (at the expense of the population) or you lose efficiency altogether.
Chen focused on the cost of law enforcement. There is a baseline cost to creating laws, but applying and enforcing them scales with size. In large countries, enforcement becomes increasingly difficult, even in authoritarian states such as China, where the state’s rule is supposed to be absolute. The result, Chen said, is that “rule of law” gives way to arbitrary rule.
There is more: A subjugated Taiwan would lose fiscal independence. Taxes would not fund Taiwanese roads or schools; they would disappear into the massive machinery of the Chinese state.
To illustrate the point, Chen presented a graph comparing two metrics: marginal governance cost and marginal scale benefit. The first measures how much it costs to govern a population, the second how much wealth a country gains from its size.
According to Chen’s model, the two curves cross at about 150 million people, but beyond that, a population becomes a burden rather than a benefit. China has long since passed that point. Meanwhile, countries such as Germany and Japan hover near the “optimal” size.
Chen compared it to trimming a company: Sometimes, staying lean means staying efficient. He likened it to parenting. “If you have two kids, you know what they are up to. If you have 120, your household becomes unmanageable,” and face it: Raising two kids is already hard enough.
Tsao offered a similar take.
When I asked him the best way to resist what he called “the evil of unification,” he surprised me by answering that it is to make Taiwan’s judiciary and executive branches even more efficient.
If you think Taiwan is already hard to govern, just imagine it as a province of a behemoth state.
This idea resonates deeply with me. My career has taken me from Belgium to Lithuania to Taiwan, all small nations that punch above their weight. I have even made documentaries about Europe’s microstates. What I have consistently found is not just that small countries are wealthier, but that they are also more livable. They work better. They feel closer to the ground.
In small European states, people complain about taxes, but they receive solid services in return. Public infrastructure works. Bureaucracies remain accessible. You can get things done. No utopia, sure, but compared with sprawling giant states, small democracies feel human.
Chen’s argument might be unconventional — and it is not meant to be the central one — but it reflects something I have witnessed firsthand: There is dignity in smallness. There is value in a nation that operates on a human scale.
Taiwan not only deserves the right to exist; it might also possess something more practical — the sheer luck of being a small country that works.
Julien Oeuillet is a journalist in Taiwan. He is the founding editor of Indo-Pacific Open News. He also writes and produces radio and television programs for several English-language publications globally.
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