History is a compass for navigating geopolitical uncertainty and safeguarding political autonomy. When great powers revert to Cold War-style zero-sum thinking, trust collapses, civic space contracts and international norms fracture. The danger deepens when crisis situations are exploited to target dissent under a facade of legality. Post-2019 Hong Kong warns how national security regimes can weaponize law to suppress pluralism, dismantle democratic governance and silence civil society in the name of order.
The erosion of rights in Hong Kong carries profound lessons for Taiwan’s defense of autonomy and the future of cross-strait relations. These lessons are urgently relevant to the nation as it faces mounting military pressure, and legislative disputes over budgets and defense priorities.
Washington’s assertive posture toward smaller states, from military intervention in Venezuela to talk of direct control over Greenland, reveals a recurring dilemma of contemporary geopolitics: External guarantees might secure short-term survival, but can also erode long-term sovereignty and undermine respect for international norms.
Meanwhile, Iran’s youth-led uprisings reflect a global pattern of dissent in which digitally connected and morally driven young people confront regimes that mistake coercion for consent. From Taiwan’s Sunflower movement to protests in Hong Kong and Myanmar, we learn that democratic legitimacy cannot be commanded; it must be continuously earned.
For Taiwan, democratic resilience must be cultivated from the bottom up. Three lessons stand out:
First, democracy thrives on accountability, not fear. Empowering civic institutions is essential to sustaining democratic substance. Democracy is more than periodic elections; it depends on durable mechanisms of checks and balances. Electoral integrity, judicial independence, a free press and a vibrant civil society form the armor against constitutional decay. Where these safeguards weaken, laws cease to protect and instead become a tool of domination. Democratic leadership is grounded in trust and responsibility, not imposed through coercion or emergency rule.
Second, legal clarity and strategic alliances deter aggression more effectively than ambiguity. Deterrence should be embedded in law and multilateralism. Freedom of navigation has long anchored stability in the western Pacific, even as China and the US show tendencies toward unilateral rulemaking. Taiwan’s security and prosperity continue to rest on international norms and coordinated partnerships with like-minded regional actors. While the US’ Taiwan Relations Act might buy time and flexibility for Washington, legal clarity and multilateral commitments generate endurance and deterrence.
Third, youth engagement is foundational to good governance. Tehran’s streets remind us that legitimacy must be interactive and rooted in civic participation. Citizens ultimately measure governments by tangible results: housing affordability, job opportunities and distributive fairness. Taiwan’s experience under Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) authoritarianism offers a sobering lesson: When enforcement power centralizes and accountability blurs, institutions drift from serving the public to ensuring regime survival. Therefore, engaging with young people channels their activism into constructive efforts that strengthen democracy.
In today’s fractured global landscape, Taiwan’s strongest defense is a democracy that citizens can test, contest and reform. Resilience cannot be outsourced. Strategic prudence entails deterring threats wisely, governing transparently and listening seriously to young people whose futures are at stake.
Joseph Tse-Hei Lee is a professor of history at Pace University in New York.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) challenges and ignores the international rules-based order by violating Taiwanese airspace using a high-flying drone: This incident is a multi-layered challenge, including a lawfare challenge against the First Island Chain, the US, and the world. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) defines lawfare as “controlling the enemy through the law or using the law to constrain the enemy.” Chen Yu-cheng (陳育正), an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of China Military Affairs Studies, at Taiwan’s Fu Hsing Kang College (National Defense University), argues the PLA uses lawfare to create a precedent and a new de facto legal
In the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
Chile has elected a new government that has the opportunity to take a fresh look at some key aspects of foreign economic policy, mainly a greater focus on Asia, including Taiwan. Still, in the great scheme of things, Chile is a small nation in Latin America, compared with giants such as Brazil and Mexico, or other major markets such as Colombia and Argentina. So why should Taiwan pay much attention to the new administration? Because the victory of Chilean president-elect Jose Antonio Kast, a right-of-center politician, can be seen as confirming that the continent is undergoing one of its periodic political shifts,
Taiwan’s long-term care system has fallen into a structural paradox. Staffing shortages have led to a situation in which almost 20 percent of the about 110,000 beds in the care system are vacant, but new patient admissions remain closed. Although the government’s “Long-term Care 3.0” program has increased subsidies and sought to integrate medical and elderly care systems, strict staff-to-patient ratios, a narrow labor pipeline and rising inflation-driven costs have left many small to medium-sized care centers struggling. With nearly 20,000 beds forced to remain empty as a consequence, the issue is not isolated management failures, but a far more
RSS