Faced with the threat of an invasion from China, Taiwan must improve its military preparedness, which includes increasing its defense budget. These are things that belong to the realm of “hard power.”
Beijing and Taipei are grappling for control over a long story arc to persuade the international community — on official and civic levels — of the truth about Taiwan’s sovereignty status. “Soft power” is an indispensable way of achieving this, and it is being used by both sides.
Senior lecturer M. Syaprin Zahidi writes, in an article published on this page, of the Taiwan-Indonesian context and of the importance of public diplomacy in extending Taiwan’s outreach to that country.
Whereas the Indonesian government currently observes the “one China” policy, the general public is divided on its perceptions of Taiwan and Chinese Communist Party’s claims over it, Zahidi says, adding that these perceptions are largely shaped by the public diplomacy being carried out by their governments: Taipei’s New Southbound Policy (NSP) and Beijing’s Confucian Institute and student exchange programs.
The government also has a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to facilitate the employment of Indian workers in Taiwan. While this is primarily aimed at addressing labor shortages, it also has implications for soft power outreach, as it will help Taiwanese broaden their understanding of the Indian culture and vice versa. This will, in turn, set the scene for a deepening of ties between Taipei and New Delhi. The MOU is designed to work on multiple levels, enhancing exchanges at the civil and official levels, and fostering India’s investment in Taiwan’s economic and political stability. It can be seen as an extension of the government’s NSP, to transcend the constraints on international participation at the official level by raising Taiwan’s profile among the Indian populace. However, it met a stumbling block soon after its signing, with discriminatory outbursts being posted on Taiwanese social media platforms.
These inflammatory and derogatory posts about Indian workers were “misleading and harmed Taiwan’s international image,” the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said. It put the comments down to cognitive warfare tactics aimed at tarnishing Taiwan’s image as a multiethnic country that respects human rights.
It was unfortunate that Minister of Labor Hsu Ming-chun (許銘春) on Monday made clumsy, culturally insensitive comments in an interview, suggesting that the government had selected Indian workers from the northeastern part of the country as “their skin color and dietary habits are closer to ours.”
Uma Chinnannan, a doctoral candidate from India currently studying at National Chengchi University, writes in an article also published on this page that Hsu’s comments, although meant to ease integration, actually highlighted the challenges of fostering cultural compatibility without perpetuating stereotypes.
She writes that her experiences while living in Taiwan have been overwhelmingly positive, but adds that the government needs to provide comprehensive education and must be proactive in promoting integration and cultural understanding.
Meanwhile, Japan is bolstering its shrinking workforce with foreign workers and is introducing supportive measures, from changes to the working environment to language education and life counseling. It wants to encourage foreigners to work in Japan and help them integrate into Japanese society.
Taiwan has an even more pressing need to ensure that the integration of foreign nationals succeeds. The government clearly recognizes the importance of soft power, given initiatives such as the NSP and the MOU on Indian migrant workers. It should take a leaf out of Japan’s book and ensure that the correct policies are in place to promote integration. It should also make sure that its own ministers are briefed on the importance and intricacies of cultural sensitivity.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS