President William Lai (賴清德) last week attended a dinner in Taipei with representatives from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). During the event, he expressed “relief” about the release of Israeli hostages and said that Taiwan had “provided assistance to the Israeli people through humanitarian aid and medical supplies.”
While such remarks might reflect Taiwan’s concern for humanitarian issues, they highlight a glaring omission: the ongoing catastrophe in Gaza. Palestinian civilians, particularly women and children, have been under relentless bombardment and severe obstruction of humanitarian relief. This silence exposes a troubling double standard in Taiwan’s human rights discourse — one that threatens to undermine its international credibility.
Over the past two years, Gaza has faced one of the most devastating humanitarian crises in modern history.
UN data showed that more than 37,000 Palestinians have been killed and nearly 2 million have been displaced. Amnesty International and several governments have condemned Israel for serious contraventions of international humanitarian law. South Africa has gone a step further, filing a case with the International Court of Justice, accusing Israel of genocide.
Taiwan’s government has remained silent, continuing to deepen diplomatic and economic ties with Israel. This raises an uncomfortable question: Can Taiwan still claim to uphold universal human rights while turning a blind eye to suffering in Gaza?
Amnesty International said that Israel’s actions in Gaza are crimes against humanity, including the deliberate killing of civilians, forced displacement, collective punishment and the obstruction of humanitarian aid.
The organization urged governments to support the International Criminal Court in investigating and holding Israel accountable. Refusing to do so would only perpetuate Israel’s sense of impunity and weaken the global human rights framework.
If the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Presidential Office continue to highlight the “good news” of hostage releases while ignoring the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, this reveals not only a moral blind spot, but also a strategic misjudgment. Taiwan’s strength in global diplomacy lies in its moral standing — its ability to present itself as a democracy committed to universal values. If it applies those values selectively, it risks losing the moral high ground that has long distinguished it from authoritarian regimes.
At a time when the international community is calling for a ceasefire and increased humanitarian access, Taiwan’s one-sided sympathy for Israel risks portraying it as inconsistent on human rights. Such a stance could alienate potential allies in the Global South and civil society organizations that have historically supported Taiwan’s democratic aspirations.
Taiwan has much to gain by adopting a principled, balanced position — one that acknowledges the security concerns of all parties while reaffirming the universal rights of people. Calling for an immediate ceasefire, urging respect for international humanitarian law and offering aid to Palestinians in Gaza would not only demonstrate moral courage, but also improve Taiwan’s reputation as a responsible and compassionate democracy.
Taiwan’s history gives it a unique moral perspective. Having struggled for decades to secure democracy and human rights, Taiwan understands the value of global solidarity. Just as Taiwan hopes the world would stand with it in times of crisis, it, too, should stand with others when their fundamental rights are under assault.
Human rights cannot be selective, nor should moral conviction be silenced by diplomatic convenience. If Taiwan truly aspires to be a nation founded on human rights values, it must have the courage to speak out for justice — even when doing so is politically inconvenient.
Silence in the face of suffering is not neutrality; it is complicity. Taiwan must choose to be on the side of humanity. Only by doing so could it earn the respect, trust and solidarity of the international community it so rightly seeks.
Chiu E-ling is the executive director of Amnesty International Taiwan. Echo Lin is the chair of Amnesty International Taiwan.
China’s recent aggressive military posture around Taiwan simply reflects the truth that China is a millennium behind, as Kobe City Councilor Norihiro Uehata has commented. While democratic countries work for peace, prosperity and progress, authoritarian countries such as Russia and China only care about territorial expansion, superpower status and world dominance, while their people suffer. Two millennia ago, the ancient Chinese philosopher Mencius (孟子) would have advised Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) that “people are the most important, state is lesser, and the ruler is the least important.” In fact, the reverse order is causing the great depression in China right now,
We are used to hearing that whenever something happens, it means Taiwan is about to fall to China. Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) cannot change the color of his socks without China experts claiming it means an invasion is imminent. So, it is no surprise that what happened in Venezuela over the weekend triggered the knee-jerk reaction of saying that Taiwan is next. That is not an opinion on whether US President Donald Trump was right to remove Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro the way he did or if it is good for Venezuela and the world. There are other, more qualified
This should be the year in which the democracies, especially those in East Asia, lose their fear of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) “one China principle” plus its nuclear “Cognitive Warfare” coercion strategies, all designed to achieve hegemony without fighting. For 2025, stoking regional and global fear was a major goal for the CCP and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA), following on Mao Zedong’s (毛澤東) Little Red Book admonition, “We must be ruthless to our enemies; we must overpower and annihilate them.” But on Dec. 17, 2025, the Trump Administration demonstrated direct defiance of CCP terror with its record US$11.1 billion arms
The immediate response in Taiwan to the extraction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro by the US over the weekend was to say that it was an example of violence by a major power against a smaller nation and that, as such, it gave Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) carte blanche to invade Taiwan. That assessment is vastly oversimplistic and, on more sober reflection, likely incorrect. Generally speaking, there are three basic interpretations from commentators in Taiwan. The first is that the US is no longer interested in what is happening beyond its own backyard, and no longer preoccupied with regions in other
RSS