Former US president Donald Trump made international headlines in July with his abrupt comments that Taiwan should pay the US for its defense and accusing Taipei of stealing the US’ chip industry. These statements sparked significant outrage. Public opinion was largely critical, viewing Trump’s remarks as an unjust and simplistic approach to a complex geopolitical relationship.
Despite the public outcry, the government opted for a balanced response, emphasizing its ongoing efforts to bolster national defense and expressing gratitude for the US’ continued support.
It was not the first time that Trump had made controversial comments about international relations and it clearly would not be the last. These statements are consistent with his long-standing anti-globalist stance on international affairs, which prioritizes US interests over international commitments and significant global issues, such as arms control and climate change.
During his campaign for the presidency and while in office, Trump repeatedly said the US should not involve itself in global issues as extensively as it had in the past. This perspective was evident in several key foreign policy decisions he made, including the US’ withdrawal from the Paris Agreement on climate change, the Iran nuclear deal, the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty and the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
In addition, Trump insistently called on NATO allies to “pay their bills” and allocate at least 2 percent of their GDP to defense, as stipulated in the NATO Pact. His unforeseen statements and actions often left international allies uncertain about the reliability of US commitments, leading to the coining of the term “Trump-proof.”
Trump’s unwillingness to engage in global issues, despite running the country that created and led the international system, was a major point of concern. His stance is often attributed to his business background, evidenced by his frequent use of business jargon in international affairs.
This approach further fuels concerns about the stability and predictability of US foreign policy under his leadership.
The potential return of Trump to the US presidency has sparked concern across the world, particularly among its allies. International actors are thus taking proactive steps to “Trump-proof” their agreements and engagements with the US, aiming to ensure continuity and reliability in the face of potential political shifts.
One of the most significant examples was spearheaded by NATO. Given Trump’s previous criticisms and unpredictable stance toward NATO missions and members, particularly regarding allied support for Ukraine, the alliance has been working on mechanisms to ensure stable and predictable support for Ukraine.
This includes discussions about a US$100 billion fund to provide long-term military aid, ensuring that aid continues regardless of who the US president is. Although many experts are not convinced about the feasibility of such plans, these efforts show that NATO allies intend to diversify their strategic means, in the absence of US involvement.
Taiwan was in Trump’s crosshairs with his latest comments about its defense and chip industry. These statements have added to the geopolitical uncertainty in the Taiwan Strait. On a government level, Taiwan refrained from confronting Trump’s statements directly, instead emphasizing its commitment to national defense and expressing readiness to take further actions while thanking Washington for its support. This diplomatic approach underscores Taiwan’s recognition of the critical importance of US support in the face of the persistently increasing threat from China.
Taiwan’s strategic significance in the Asia-Pacific region cannot be overlooked. The nation plays a crucial role in US foreign policy, and its security is vital for maintaining regional stability. Despite Taiwan’s robust defense capabilities, the power imbalance between China and Taiwan is considerable, necessitating continued US support.
Therefore, Taiwan faces challenging decisions in light of a potential Trump return to the presidency. On one hand, Trump would likely maintain his anti-China policies, which Taiwan might benefit from. On the other hand, his anti-China stance might not automatically mean unwavering support for Taiwan.
At this juncture, it is essential to consider what Taiwan’s “Trump-proof” policy options are, if there even are any.
Taiwan’s viable options are limited. The government might have to acquiesce to Trump’s demands, which could involve increased arms deals or even the relocation of its chip industry. Alternatively, it could explore opportunities to restore communication channels with China to preserve peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait.
Despite criticisms regarding the feasibility of Trump-proofing policies, Taiwan still needs to consider diversifying its strategic means to maintain peace, security and the “status quo” in a region marked by uncertainties.
Proactively developing a multifaceted strategy would be essential for Taiwan to maintain the complex geopolitical landscape and ensure its long-term security and stability.
Harun Talha Ayanoglu, PhD, is a Taiwan Center for Security Studies research associate.
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump’s second administration has gotten off to a fast start with a blizzard of initiatives focused on domestic commitments made during his campaign. His tariff-based approach to re-ordering global trade in a manner more favorable to the United States appears to be in its infancy, but the significant scale and scope are undeniable. That said, while China looms largest on the list of national security challenges, to date we have heard little from the administration, bar the 10 percent tariffs directed at China, on specific priorities vis-a-vis China. The Congressional hearings for President Trump’s cabinet have, so far,
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS