Last month, the UN confirmed that the world has failed to contain global warming to the Paris Agreement’s threshold of 1.5°C, sounding a death knell for global climate governance. This is no longer a future warning, but an immediate reality.
Humankind is facing a crossroads of existential consequence, and yet US President Donald Trump is instead pushing to expand fossil fuel policy and refused to send an official delegation to this year’s COP30 climate summit. The world’s largest economy and historical emitter, it seems, is stepping back from the fight.
These climate and political shocks come as dual blows to Taiwan, which is on the front line of the climate crisis and highly reliant on international trade. Alarm bells are ringing not just for the environment, but over national security and economic survival.
The destructive consequences of the Trump administration’s decisions are not just about US carbon emissions, but about their political reverberations. Institutions of global governance do not come easy, and the US’ absence has served to seriously undermine the Paris Agreement.
Against a backdrop of warming set to exceed the 1.5°C threshold, world leaders gathered at COP30 to discuss emergency response measures to “loss and damage.” The lack of US presence sends a clear signal that “America first” and barefaced energy nationalism are prioritized above any principle of shared global responsibility.
There is a danger of major developing countries holding up US inaction as an excuse to delay their own decarbonization, and that the undercutting of global climate finance commitments would push vulnerable nations in need of adaptation funding into further precarity. The cooling effect of the US breaking ranks on international cooperation is unmistakable.
In Taiwan, we cannot afford to view the crisis as the business of other countries. A breach of 1.5°C of warming constitutes a direct and immediate threat to Taiwan’s survival. Powerful typhoons and floods are set to become a regular occurrence, while high temperatures and extreme dry periods threaten key sectors, including agriculture and the semiconductor industry, which require stable supplies of electricity and water.
The UN’s admission of failure means that it is time for Taiwan to take its plans for domestic adaptation and building resilience to a wartime level of urgency. There is no time for empty talk about net zero by 2050 — we must confront the imminent climate shocks now.
As our most important political ally, the US’ choice to step back and embrace fossil fuels would inevitably embolden domestic voices calling to slow down emission reductions to protect the economy. Going down this road would only further isolate Taiwan economically. The US might have abandoned the fight, but the EU stands ready and waiting as the world’s largest single market, armed with its Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) as an economic goad. Being an export-oriented country, Taiwan’s key industries of steel, petrochemicals and electronic components tie it to the EU’s green supply chain.
If Taiwan chooses to follow the US’ lead, it can expect to face high EU carbon taxes and exclusion from the supply chains of international brands like Apple and Microsoft, which are bound by environmental, social, and governance commitments. These economic ramifications are too great for Taiwan to ignore.
Facing climate breakdown and the crumbling of political leadership, Taiwan’s response must be focused and determined. We cannot allow for distractions or wishful thinking, and we must recognize that a net zero transition is no longer just an environmental issue, but one of economic survival and national security.
First, the government must resist internal pressure and accelerate its deployment of renewable energy, in particular in geothermal, biomass and energy storage systems to ensure a stable transition.
Second is to transform and upgrade industry — the government must shift from across-the-board subsidies to mandatory transitional guidance for carbon-intensive industries to adopt new technologies and comply with CBAM standards.
Finally, climate resilience must become a core principle of all public development projects. From the urban “sponge city” concept to disaster-warning systems in rural areas, public infrastructure and engineering projects must be reimagined to fully reflect the reality of a world having broken the 1.5°C threshold.
The US’ move is a gamble that Taiwan cannot afford to make. This moment of global disorder is exactly the point at which Taiwan must demonstrate its resilience and ability to turn the crisis into an opportunity for transformational change.
Chen Jie-an is a legal specialist for a technology corporation.
Translated by Gilda Knox Streader
The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has sent the vast Asian chemicals industry into a tailspin. Deprived of the likes of Qatari natural gas and Saudi Arabian oil, the region’s fertilizer and plastics plants are slowing production or even shutting down. Everywhere except China, that is. In petrochemicals, China is unique. As well as a traditional industry that uses oil and gas as feedstock, it has parallel output that relies on its abundant domestic coal. Unsurprisingly, India and other regional powers want to copy and paste the Chinese method. This would not be easy — or climate friendly. The
KMT Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun’s (鄭麗文) recent visit to Beijing and her upcoming visit to Washington will serve as a high-level test of her diplomatic mettle. In Beijing, Cheng was received with symbolic gestures, a warm reception, and high-level access. In Washington, she will receive far less pomp and far sharper questions about the KMT’s vision for the future of Taiwan. Her challenge will be to persuade Washington that the KMT’s engagement with China can coexist with strong deterrence. Cheng’s April 7-12 visit to mainland China coincided with an intense period of conflict in Iran. Despite the strategic significance of Cheng’s trip,
History might remember 2026, not 2022, as the year artificial intelligence (AI) truly changed everything. ChatGPT’s launch was a product moment. What is happening now is an anthropological moment: AI is no longer merely answering questions. It is now taking initiative and learning from others to get things done, behaving less like software and more like a colleague. The economic consequence is the rise of the one-person company — a structure anticipated in the 2024 book The Choices Amid Great Changes, which I coauthored. The real target of AI is not labor. It is hierarchy. When AI sharply reduces the cost
US President Donald Trump recently repeated his claim that “Taiwan stole America’s chip industry,” reigniting public debate on the issue. As a former Taiwanese minister of economic affairs and an entrepreneur deeply involved in semiconductor supply chain development, I feel a responsibility to clarify this misunderstanding. From the perspective of global industrial evolution and the economic principle of comparative advantage, such a statement appears overly simplistic and risks obscuring the essence of the issue. The rise of Taiwan’s semiconductor industry was not built on “replacing America,” but rather emerged as a result of countries pursuing different development paths within the
RSS