Taiwan tensions offer India a strategic opportunity, not just a challenge

In the earlier part, the discussion was about the current situation in Taiwan and the impact it has on India.

From India’s point of view, as a friendly and neutral observer of the dynamics of the situation, there are various alternative responses the country could think of by way of addressing the challenges arising from it.

The main idea should be to shift aggressively to a proactive posture, leveraging the situation as an opportunity, strengthening the existing levels of economic cooperation with Taiwan in areas such as say, electronics, artificial intelligence, and secure access to Taiwanese fabrication facilities in other countries such as the United States and Germany.

India, as an observer, needs to appreciate the pattern and quality of the relationship that other countries maintain with Taiwan. While the United States is legally bound to provide defensive support to it while maintaining unofficial ties, Japan, and countries belonging to the European Union, have a vital stake in maintaining peace in the region and are officially deepening their ties with Taiwan, as Beijing, however, views as foreign interference, further exacerbating tensions.

Essentially, the situation is a clash of ideologies, a stand-off between authoritarian China and the vibrant and democratic Taiwan.

India’s strategy should be informed by the fact that such situations are not peculiar to Taiwan alone.

For example, Kashmir, part of India, is claimed by Pakistan and China, leading to decades of conflict. The Aksai Chin area in Arunachal Pradesh, India, is a disputed border region between India and China. Yet another such situation pertains toTibet, whose status is complex. Officially, it is the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR), considered by China as an integral part of the People's Republic of China, with its administration overseen by Beijing. However, exiled Tibetans and supporters view it as an illegally occupied nation, citing historical independence, China's 1951 annexation, and ongoing human rights issues like restrictions on culture, religion, and free speech. No country formally recognizes the Tibetan government-in-exile and most countries, including India, officially recognize the Tibet Autonomous Region as part of China.

Another example is that of Kachchatheevu, a small islet in the Palk Strait, which, though a legally part of Sri Lanka in terms of the 1974 and 1976 maritime agreements, remains a contentious political issue in India, particularly in Tamil Nadu. Ongoing legal challenges (sub-judice) and historical claims for its retrieval, despite diplomatic agreements allowing Indian fishermen access for rest and fishing, often lead to disputes. Sri Lanka maintains the issue is settled, while India's government deals with ongoing fishing disputes through established diplomatic channels.

Yet another situation of a similar genre pertains to islands like Spratly and Parcel, maritime zones rich in resources and shipping lanes. In the South China Sea, about which there are multiple overlapping claims by China, Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei, and Taiwan.

Likewise, a dispute exists between Japan, China, and Taiwan over the small and uninhabited Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands.

Such disputes are real and so common elsewhere in the world. For instance, the main historical dispute about Alaska was the Alaska Boundary D where Canada (then under Britain) and the U.S., disagreed on the border of the Alaskan Panhandle, especially concerning access to the Klondike Gold Fields; the dispute, fueled by gold rushes, was settled by a 1903 tribunal that largely favored the U.S. position, granting America control of the vital coastal ports. Russia sold Alaska to the United States in 1867 for $7.2 million, a transaction known as the Alaska Purchase, negotiated by U.S. Secretary of State William Seward to end Russia's presence in North America and secure U.S. access to the Pacific, despite initial skepticism in the U.S. that called it "Seward's Folly".The deal was finalized with the treaty signing in March 1867, and the U.S. formally took possession in October 1867, adding nearly 600,000 square miles of territory. Russia had been struggling with debt from the Crimean War and found Alaska an economic liability to manage and supply. It feared losing the territory to Great Britain (its rival) and saw selling to the U.S. as a way to prevent that, while also focusing on Asian expansion. That ended Russian colonization in North America, expanded U.S. territory, and later proved valuable with gold discoveries.

The Israeli-Palestinian region presents a similar situation, one of an even more complex nature. The origin lies in the movement for a Jewish state, which gained traction in the nineteenth century, as Jews increasingly migrated to Ottoman Palestine to escape anti-semitism in Europe and return to a land intimately linked to Jewish religion, culture, and history.

The conflict has exacerbated regional tensions across the Middle East. The Israel Defence Force launched aground invasion of Lebanon following months of cross-border skirmishes with Hezbollah, which began striking northern Israel following the attack by Hamas, a chapter of the Muslim Brotherhood with the objective of annihilating Israel and replacing it with a Palestinian Islamic state. Iran’s support for Hamas and other regional militant groups threatening Israel, combined with concerns over the regime’s nuclear program, culminated in Israel’s decision to preemptively strike Iran in June 2025, initiating a twelve-day conflict that also led to the United States bombing the most hardened Iranian nuclear facilities.

The Gaza peace plan, officially the Comprehensive Plan to End the Gaza Conflict, is a multilateral agreement between Israel and Hamas that aims to address the ongoing Gaza war and broader Middle Eastern crisis. Led by United States president Donald Trump, it was negotiated in consultation with many Arab and Muslim countries. The plan was announced by Trump on September 29, 2025.

Whatever the final outcome of the issues which all these regions are facing, the fact that people are busy struggling for and hoping against hope to achieve their cherished objective of autonomy and Independence for their country is enough for the politicians contentedly to continue with their agenda without needless worry about adverse public opinion.

As the famous star in the firmament of Urdu poetry, Mirza Ghalib, said,

“Humko maloomhai jannat kihaqeeqat lekin,

Dilke khushrakhneko ‘Ghalib’, yehkhyal achcha hai.”

(The writer was formerly Chief Secretary, Government of Andhra Pradesh)