Taiwan faces an image challenge even among its allies, as it must constantly counter falsehoods and misrepresentations spread by its more powerful neighbor, the People’s Republic of China (PRC). While Taiwan refrains from disparaging its troublesome neighbor to other countries, the PRC is working not only to forge a narrative about itself, its intentions and value to the international community, but is also spreading lies about Taiwan. Governments, parliamentary groups and civil societies worldwide are caught in this narrative tug-of-war, each responding in their own way.
National governments have the power to push back against what they know to be lies about Taiwan’s status, and yet, for practical reasons, are limited in what they can do and say, due to the PRC’s economic and political clout.
Parliamentary groups have more flexibility and independence, and can base their activities and allegiances more on their own sense of what is right and true. They can initiate studies and pass resolutions without the constraints that their governments have, and have the political authority to influence government policy and the legitimacy to say they represent the desires of their constituencies. They can also send delegations and envoys to visit Taiwan.
Taken together, these advantages were key to the formation of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China.
Parliamentary groups are more willing to intervene on human rights issues, but more reluctant when it comes to complex territorial disputes. Even if, from another country’s perspective, a cursory or incomplete understanding of Taiwan’s sovereignty leads to viewing its status as “undetermined,” human rights can still justify involvement. Even a contested state should be protected in international law against the use of force. Indeed, contested states are the places where this risk is highest.
The third level is civil society in other countries. People might hold rational and morally sound views on the situation in Taiwan, yet remain unaware of the details due to distance and the absence of direct relevance to their daily lives. This presents a challenge and an opportunity.
Last month, the Central European Institute of Asian Studies (CEIAS), a transnational think tank that has a presence in Taiwan, released a report titled Echoes and Resistance: China’s Discourse Power and Public Perceptions in Central Europe. The report examines Beijing’s use since 2013 of official channels, state-affiliated influencers and cooperation with central European opinion leaders to shape perceptions of China in the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia.
The narratives pushed, and the degree to which they were accepted, varied from country to country, but not greatly. The report said the propaganda efforts have not found fertile ground, with strong acceptance or outright rejection limited to small percentages at either end of the political spectrum. Responses to most questions clustered around the center, with many participants choosing “somewhat disagree,” “neither agree nor disagree” or “somewhat agree.”
In other words, despite a decade of coordinated Chinese propaganda, public attitudes toward the PRC in those countries are generally negative or non-committal. The report says that people in the region “mostly view Chinese policies on Tibet, Xinjiang, Hong Kong and Taiwan negatively and do not tend to accept China’s delineation of its ‘core interests.’”
Rather than regarding the effort as a waste of resources, the government should view it as an opportunity to engage more deeply — demonstrating to the citizens of those countries, who by virtue of their histories are less receptive to authoritarian rule, that Taiwan offers more to connect with and empathize with than China.
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
The two major opposition parties, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), jointly announced on Tuesday last week that former TPP lawmaker Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) would be their joint candidate for Chiayi mayor, following polling conducted earlier this month. It is the first case of blue-white (KMT-TPP) cooperation in selecting a joint candidate under an agreement signed by their chairpersons last month. KMT and TPP supporters have blamed their 2024 presidential election loss on failing to decide on a joint candidate, which ended in a dramatic breakdown with participants pointing fingers, calling polls unfair, sobbing and walking
In the opening remarks of her meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on Friday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) framed her visit as a historic occasion. In his own remarks, Xi had also emphasized the history of the relationship between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Where they differed was that Cheng’s account, while flawed by its omissions, at least partially corresponded to reality. The meeting was certainly historic, albeit not in the way that Cheng and Xi were signaling, and not from the perspective
RSS