Taiwanese media are not only ignoring the suffering of civilians in conflicts in Iran, Lebanon and the West Bank, they are treating it as irrelevant.
On a typical political talk show, the pattern is unmistakable. Familiar commentators — former Broadcasting Corp of China chairman Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康), former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislator Julian Kuo (郭正亮), former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislator and host Alex Tsai (蔡正元) — circle the same themes: Is the US distracted? Does China benefit from conflict in the Middle East? Does war in the Middle East raise risks for Taiwan?
What is largely missing is the most basic fact of war: civilians dying.
When mentioned at all, it is often reduced to a passing phrase — “collateral damage” — before the discussion quickly returns to strategy. Civilian suffering is not denied; it is simply downgraded to background noise.
That reflects a deeper habit in Taiwanese meia of filtering global events through a single question: Does this help or harm Taiwan?
Taiwan is not a distant observer of geopolitics. It lives under the shadow of an immediate and growing existential threat from China. In such a context, it is neither surprising nor unreasonable that public discourse prioritizes survival over distant humanitarian concerns.
The problem is when strategy becomes the only lens.
Taiwan’s commentariat often treats the US as a stable, rational, strategic actor that can allocate military resources across regions at will. Some pro-US President Donald Trump or pro-strongman narratives go further, implying that US foreign policy is driven primarily by the will of a single leader.
That is a serious misreading.
In the US, civilian suffering is not a side issue; it is a political force. Media coverage, congressional debates and public protests revolve around whether wars are justified, whether force is proportional and whether the US is complicit in civilian harm.
Supporters of military action must defend these questions; critics weaponize them. Either way, civilian deaths shape the debate.
In the US, strategy does not override morality — it is constrained by it.
The US is a democracy with built-in volatility. Midterm elections can swiftly shift congressional control and undercut ongoing military commitments. Courts can impose meaningful limits on executive power. Media scrutiny and public opinion can intensify rapidly when civilian casualties rise.
When humanitarian concerns escalate, the political space for strategic action can shrink just as quickly.
What Taipei sees as “US distraction” is often not a matter of capability, but of legitimacy.
Ignoring this dynamic leads to flawed conclusions. Analysts who focus solely on carrier deployments and force posture, while overlooking domestic political pressure, are working with an incomplete model of US power.
Taiwan has long grounded its international identity in democracy and human rights. Yet when civilian suffering elsewhere is consistently treated as irrelevant, that moral narrative risks becoming hollow.
A society that understands its own vulnerability should also understand the suffering of others — not as a distraction, but as part of the same moral universe it seeks support from.
None of that means Taiwan should abandon strategic thinking. On the contrary, it means taking strategy more seriously.
Power defines what is possible, but in a democracy like the US, politics defines what is sustainable. Civilian deaths are not background noise. They are variables that can reshape policy.
If Taiwan’s media continue to filter global conflicts solely through the question of “what does this mean for us?” they will not only misread distant wars, but also misread the very ally the nation depends on.
That misreading could carry consequences far beyond the Middle East.
Simon Tang is an adjunct professor at California State University, Fullerton, who lectures on 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
In late January, Taiwan’s first indigenous submarine, the Hai Kun (海鯤, or Narwhal), completed its first submerged dive, reaching a depth of roughly 50m during trials in the waters off Kaohsiung. By March, it had managed a fifth dive, still well short of the deep-water and endurance tests required before the navy could accept the vessel. The original delivery deadline of November last year passed months ago. CSBC Corp, Taiwan, the lead contractor, now targets June and the Ministry of National Defense is levying daily penalties for every day the submarine remains unfinished. The Hai Kun was supposed to be
Most schoolchildren learn that the circumference of the Earth is about 40,000km. They do not learn that the global economy depends on just 160 of those kilometers. Blocking two narrow waterways — the Strait of Hormuz and the Taiwan Strait — could send the economy back in time, if not to the Stone Age that US President Donald Trump has been threatening to bomb Iran back to, then at least to the mid-20th century, before the Rolling Stones first hit the airwaves. Over the past month and a half, Iran has turned the Strait of Hormuz, which is about 39km wide at
There is a peculiar kind of political theater unfolding in East Asia — one that would be laughable if its consequences were not so dangerous. Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) on April 12 returned from Beijing, where she met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and spoke earnestly about preserving “peace” and maintaining the “status quo.” It is a position that sounds responsible, even prudent. It is also a fiction. Taiwan is, by any honest definition, an independent country. It governs itself, defends itself, elects its leaders, and functions as a free and sovereign democracy. Independence is not a
RSS