Australia’s top think tank, the Lowy Institute, released its annual Asia Power Index on Monday, and Taiwan was one of just three nations to have gained “comprehensive power” this year amid the economic and political ravages of the COVID-19 pandemic.
The index project, launched in 2018 as a research tool for policymakers and academics, evaluates 25 nations — 26 this year — on key metrics, such as military capability, diplomatic and cultural influence, and resources. This year, three more metrics were added, including ecological threats and handling of the pandemic.
While Taiwan has been ranked 14th since 2018, its overall score this year improved 5 percent thanks to a 9 point improvement in diplomatic influence, a 1.1 point rise in cultural influence, and small increases in future resources and economic relationships, even while it lost 0.9 points each in resilience and economic capability, and 0.2 points in military capability.
However, its overall power standing has changed considerably from 2018, when it was labeled a “misfit middle power,” along with North Korea and Russia, and from last year, when it was the only middle power to show a significant downward shift in overall power, which was attributed to its geopolitical significance and “its position as a political outsider.”
What a difference a year — and a global crisis — can make.
Taiwan topped the index’s chart for international reputation and effective handling of the pandemic, just edging out New Zealand.
The institute said that competent handling of the pandemic was a key factor, but not the only one that helped Taiwan, Vietnam and Australia to improve their regional standing, as others with successful responses to the pandemic, such as New Zealand and South Korea, saw declines in their power.
Yet it included a barbed reminder that “misfit middle powers” such as Taiwan “deliver inconsistent performances across the influence measures” and that “Taiwan exerts less influence in the region than expected, given its available resources.”
So what can the government and the public take away from Taiwan’s pluses and minuses this year?
First, the nation’s economic capability, at eighth place, remains key to its global standing, but the 0.9 point decline should be cause for concern and an impetus to redouble efforts to build or strengthen trading ties with ASEAN members, India, Australia and other nations.
Second, while Taiwan placed 19th in diplomatic influence, it did see a 9 point improvement this year, probably because it ranked 10th in foreign policy bureaucracy thanks to its efficacy, with the institute’s report citing the benefits of the nation’s “substantial network of unofficial representative offices abroad.”
Third, amid the US-China struggle for primacy in the region, the future will be determined by asymmetric multipolarity, meaning that the interests of middle powers, including Taiwan, will become more important, and that nations on the margins can still take part in shaping the regional order.
Fourth — but perhaps most importantly — this year’s results, as the institute’s report says, are a “powerful reminder that legitimacy and leadership on the world stage start with the capacity of leaders to govern well at home.”
Taiwan, despite its exclusion from the WHO, has become a key influencer in the battle to contain the coronavirus, thanks to the leadership shown in the Presidential Office, the Cabinet, the Ministry of Health and Welfare, and elsewhere.
However, essential to that leadership is the legitimacy that this nation’s democracy confers, domestically and internationally, which is something that the Chinese Communist Party, with its petulant bullying attempts to silence Beijing’s critics and cower Taiwan, will never understand.
A nation has several pillars of national defense, among them are military strength, energy and food security, and national unity. Military strength is very much on the forefront of the debate, while several recent editorials have dealt with energy security. National unity and a sense of shared purpose — especially while a powerful, hostile state is becoming increasingly menacing — are problematic, and would continue to be until the nation’s schizophrenia is properly managed. The controversy over the past few days over former navy lieutenant commander Lu Li-shih’s (呂禮詩) usage of the term “our China” during an interview about his attendance
Bo Guagua (薄瓜瓜), the son of former Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Central Committee Politburo member and former Chongqing Municipal Communist Party secretary Bo Xilai (薄熙來), used his British passport to make a low-key entry into Taiwan on a flight originating in Canada. He is set to marry the granddaughter of former political heavyweight Hsu Wen-cheng (許文政), the founder of Luodong Poh-Ai Hospital in Yilan County’s Luodong Township (羅東). Bo Xilai is a former high-ranking CCP official who was once a challenger to Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) for the chairmanship of the CCP. That makes Bo Guagua a bona fide “third-generation red”
Following the BRICS summit held in Kazan, Russia, last month, media outlets circulated familiar narratives about Russia and China’s plans to dethrone the US dollar and build a BRICS-led global order. Each summit brings renewed buzz about a BRICS cross-border payment system designed to replace the SWIFT payment system, allowing members to trade without using US dollars. Articles often highlight the appeal of this concept to BRICS members — bypassing sanctions, reducing US dollar dependence and escaping US influence. They say that, if widely adopted, the US dollar could lose its global currency status. However, none of these articles provide
US president-elect Donald Trump earlier this year accused Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) of “stealing” the US chip business. He did so to have a favorable bargaining chip in negotiations with Taiwan. During his first term from 2017 to 2021, Trump demanded that European allies increase their military budgets — especially Germany, where US troops are stationed — and that Japan and South Korea share more of the costs for stationing US troops in their countries. He demanded that rich countries not simply enjoy the “protection” the US has provided since the end of World War II, while being stingy with