Climate change is a multiplier of conflict, and governance gaps are a multiplier of climate risk. The connection between Sustainable Development Goal 16 on peace, justice and strong institutions, and goal 13 on climate action can no longer be ignored. India and Taiwan are well-placed to advance both goals in tandem through cooperation grounded in resilience, transparency and shared societal strengths.
Climate exposure already shapes internal stability in India. Extreme heat has increased sharply, with temperature records tumbling across northern India in recent years, exacerbating water shortages and heightening rural distress. In Rajasthan, Maharashtra and Telangana states, local administrations now routinely activate heat action plans — early warning systems, public-cooling centers, and coordination between health and disaster-response departments to protect vulnerable populations.
These efforts illustrate how effective institutions reduce climate impacts and preserve social stability. This was first demonstrated in Ahmedabad, where a municipal heat action plan introduced after a deadly 2010 heatwave lowered heat-related mortality in subsequent years and serves today as a model for other cities.
Taiwan’s achievements in disaster-risk governance are widely recognized, especially in typhoon preparedness and earthquake response. The Central Weather Administration’s real-time alert systems, an extensive culture of community drills and strong coordination between local and central authorities have saved lives.
Typhoon Morakot triggered catastrophic landslides in 2009. The government subsequently undertook institutional reform by investing in slope-land monitoring, rapid-evacuation protocols and deeper indigenous consultation in hazard-prone areas.
Deepening India-Taiwan cooperation offers a chance to jointly advance institutional solutions for peace and climate stability. While academic collaborations already cover ecological engineering, disaster management and community adaptation, expanding these into structured joint research or practical working groups would ensure progress even with limited formal diplomacy.
Taiwan’s expertise in remote sensing, early warning systems and digital governance could support India’s efforts to modernize disaster response infrastructure, while India’s large-scale climate adaptation experiments, such as the National Disaster Response Force, the National Cyclone Resilience Programme and community-driven watershed restoration in states like Rajasthan offer lessons that Taiwan’s smaller communities could quickly adapt.
In India, the critical functions in managing water resources, relief distribution and community harmony during climate-related shocks are performed by local self-help groups, farmer cooperatives and women-led governance bodies. Taiwan’s community volunteers, neighborhood wardens and indigenous councils do the same.
In several parts of India, migration rises when the monsoon patterns fail; such migration can stress urban systems and sharpen social tensions. Taiwan also faces water shortages that impair semiconductor production and food supplies. Taiwan’s advanced water-recycling technologies and management systems could support adaptation in India’s water-stressed industrial clusters, whereas India’s large-scale solar-energy rollout could support Taiwan in accelerating its energy transition without destabilizing local communities. By reducing economic volatility, both countries could lower the risk of social grievances that often escalate into political instability.
Cooperation on peace and climate is a pathway that could be insulated from political sensitivities through diplomatic channels. Because climate and disaster-management partnerships are often less politically contentious than security or economic agreements, they can function as low-risk, high-benefit avenues of engagement even within the constraints of geopolitics.
By explicitly linking climate governance with social stability, India and Taiwan could demonstrate how democratic partnerships contribute to peace in the Indo-Pacific region. Their collaboration could serve as a model, showing that climate protection and peace are interdependent and best achieved through open, cooperative approaches between democracies.
Sutandra Singha is an independent researcher with a doctorate in international studies from Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi, specializing in climate change.
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
In an op-ed published in Foreign Affairs on Tuesday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) said that Taiwan should not have to choose between aligning with Beijing or Washington, and advocated for cooperation with Beijing under the so-called “1992 consensus” as a form of “strategic ambiguity.” However, Cheng has either misunderstood the geopolitical reality and chosen appeasement, or is trying to fool an international audience with her doublespeak; nonetheless, it risks sending the wrong message to Taiwan’s democratic allies and partners. Cheng stressed that “Taiwan does not have to choose,” as while Beijing and Washington compete, Taiwan is strongest when
RSS