Over the past decade, Taiwan and its vibrant civil society have excelled in public diplomacy. Campaigns such as “Taiwan Can Help” and “Chip in with Taiwan,” as well as Ministry of Foreign Affairs fellowships, international youth ambassador exchange programs, international forums hosted in Taiwan, visits by foreign delegations and influencers, and sporting and cultural events have brought Taiwan closer to the rest of the world.
Still, the successes have focused mainly on branding: selling Taiwan’s culture, openness and innovation to global audiences. They must continue, but they are no longer enough. The other core mission of public diplomacy — ie, policy advocacy and strategic narrative building — has fallen behind. On this front, Taiwan needs to step up.
Much of Taiwan’s policy-related outreach is top-down and Taiwan-centered. The bulk of advocacy work is done by diplomats and representative offices through traditional and new media, with events organized at academic institutions or think tanks. Those efforts matter, especially for alliance-building, but they largely reach sympathetic audiences. It seems that, too often, Taiwan ends up preaching to the choir.
The imbalance is especially clear in the fight against disinformation. Taiwan has poured significant resources into countering Chinese propaganda at home. By contrast, far less is being done to challenge the narratives in the international arena.
Meanwhile, Beijing is stepping up its narrative offensive abroad, branding Taiwan’s ruling party as “Nazis” and mischaracterizing World War II–era documents, while most of Taiwan’s counter-efforts remain focused at home. What is missing is scale, coordination and a true outward-facing civilian network capable of sustained advocacy abroad.
Israel offers a useful comparison. Hasbara (“explanation” in Hebrew) refers to Israel’s broad efforts to explain and defend its policies abroad. Whatever one thinks of its policies, Israel has built an infrastructure to mobilize Israeli and Jewish communities worldwide. Non-governmental organizations such as StandWithUs and programs like the Hasbara Fellowships train people on campuses and online, equipping them to engage skeptics, host debates and push back against hostile narratives.
Taiwan has no equivalent, yet it could be argued that it faces a far friendlier environment. Few people are inclined to attack its narrative. However, without a prepared network of credible, civilian messengers abroad, that advantage might be squandered.
Conflict over Taiwan’s future will not be confined to the Taiwan Strait. It will also be fought in classrooms, newsrooms and social media feeds. If Taiwan waits until a crisis to build its capacity in those arenas, it will be too late. Once tensions escalate, Beijing’s propaganda machine will go into overdrive and catching up will be much harder.
Taiwan must invest in strategic narrative building and policy advocacy. That means empowering grassroots actors abroad, supporting their initiatives and encouraging Taiwanese to confidently engage in debate.
Far from being a liability, such confrontational engagement can expose the weaknesses in Beijing’s claims and highlight Taiwan’s democratic values.
Taiwan’s story resonates worldwide, but stories do not tell themselves and narratives left uncontested are quickly filled by others. For Taiwan’s public diplomacy to work, Taiwanese at home and abroad must recognize that they have agency and a role to play. The government can help and facilitate, but it cannot substitute for committed people willing to speak up, organize and engage skeptical audiences.
It is this grassroots energy, supported but not directed from above, that will give Taiwan the credibility and resilience it needs in the narrative battle.
Mor Sobol is an associate professor in Tamkang University’s Department of Diplomacy and International Relations.
What began on Feb. 28 as a military campaign against Iran quickly became the largest energy-supply disruption in modern times. Unlike the oil crises of the 1970s, which stemmed from producer-led embargoes, US President Donald Trump is the first leader in modern history to trigger a cascading global energy crisis through direct military action. In the process, Trump has also laid bare Taiwan’s strategic and economic fragilities, offering Beijing a real-time tutorial in how to exploit them. Repairing the damage to Persian Gulf oil and gas infrastructure could take years, suggesting that elevated energy prices are likely to persist. But the most
Taiwan should reject two flawed answers to the Eswatini controversy: that diplomatic allies no longer matter, or that they must be preserved at any cost. The sustainable answer is to maintain formal diplomatic relations while redesigning development relationships around transparency, local ownership and democratic accountability. President William Lai’s (賴清德) canceled trip to Eswatini has elicited two predictable reactions in Taiwan. One camp has argued that the episode proves Taiwan must double down on support for every remaining diplomatic ally, because Beijing is tightening the screws, and formal recognition is too scarce to risk. The other says the opposite: If maintaining
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文), during an interview for the podcast Lanshuan Time (蘭萱時間) released on Monday, said that a US professor had said that she deserved to be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize following her meeting earlier this month with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). Cheng’s “journey of peace” has garnered attention from overseas and from within Taiwan. The latest My Formosa poll, conducted last week after the Cheng-Xi meeting, shows that Cheng’s approval rating is 31.5 percent, up 7.6 percentage points compared with the month before. The same poll showed that 44.5 percent of respondents
India’s semiconductor strategy is undergoing a quiet, but significant, recalibration. With the rollout of India Semiconductor Mission (ISM) 2.0, New Delhi is signaling a shift away from ambition-driven leaps toward a more grounded, capability-led approach rooted in industrial realities and institutional learning. Rather than attempting to enter the most advanced nodes immediately, India has chosen to prioritize mature technologies in the 28-nanometer to 65-nanometer range. That would not be a retreat, but a strategic alignment with domestic capabilities, market demand and global supply chain gaps. The shift carries the imprimatur of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, indicating that the recalibration is