TFD panel: Political, Economic and Security Dynamics in the Indo-Pacific

Organizers:
Professor Tun-jen Cheng, editor, Taiwan Journal of Democracy
Dr Allen Peng, Director of Research and Publications, Taiwan Foundation for Democracy

The Indo-Pacific Partnership and Belt and Road Initiative are two competing, even antithetical structures in the new global geopolitical and geo-economic templates. This binary competitive configuration also displays a geo-ideological dimension as the core players in the former are democratic, while those in the latter are authoritarian. The ideological divide is by no means clearcut as both groupings compete to recruit strategic players, be they like-minded regimes or not. Given its strategic location, economic-technological prowess, and democratic development, Taiwan is a valuable associate in the Indo-Pacific partnership. This partnership in turn is essential to Taiwan’s security and prosperity, as Taiwan faces a most formidable adversary at its doorstep and finds it hard to join pre-existing regional economic frameworks such as Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) and Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP). The theme for the 2025 European Association for Taiwan Studies (EATS) conference in Palacky University is Taiwan and the Indo-Pacific. This panel proposes to focus on volving patterns of interaction among existing and potential members of the Indo-Pacific partnership as well as the making of a few key initiatives within the grouping. These dynamics affect the efficacy of the partnership as well as the security and well-being of its members. Understanding these internal dynamics is particularly important to Taiwan that is not always given opportunities for participation and indeed needs to create its own paths to partner up with other members. For example, Taiwan was not included in the Indo-Pacific economic framework (for members, see appendix), launched by the U.S. in May 2022, but Taiwan has assiduously contributed to the formation of Chip-4 alliance and helped to weave the semi-conductor alliance of Indonesia, Taiwan and the U.S. in August 2024. This panel is also a good laboratory to test a number of influential propositions and observations on how nations interact. One popular theory is that economic ties are denser among democratic or authoritarian international community than between the two. Another theoretical proposition, one that is particularly important to Taiwan, is that security commitment and partnership, primarily base on common threat in the past, can be anchored on democratic value and/or economic interest, even the common threat no longer exists. A newly advanced thesis centers on factors shaping foreign aid decision: democratic nations’ foreign aid is more development-oriented and/or economic interest-motivated while authoritarian nations’ is more strategically calculated and shaped by great power dynamics. The Indo-Pacific partnership can also be a good site to apply analytic schema on inter-state conflict behavior.

Panelists and Paper Topics

1. Silicon Shield or Field? Public Opinion Evidence in Taiwan

Hsin-Hsin Pan, Soochow University and Wen-Chin Wu, IPSAS, Taiwan

This paper uses public opinion surveys and experiments to tease out partisan and other factors affecting Taiwan’s public opinion on the US-Taiwan partnership.

Abstract:

Economic peace theory posits that economic interdependence promotes peace by increasing the opportunity costs of conflict, thereby incentivizing states to avoid war. However, critics argue that such interdependence can, conversely, provoke aggression when potential aggressors perceive long-term control over strategic economic assets as worth the short-term costs of war. In light of these opposing perspectives, we argue that “silicon shield” and “silicon field” exist in Taiwan, given its dominant position in the global advanced semiconductor market. Specifically, we contend that Taiwan’s leadership in the semiconductor industry wields a “silicon shield” to deter Chinese military aggression by leveraging credible U.S. security commitment while such leadership paves a “silicon field” to precipitate Chinese attack on the belief of China outperforming the U.S.. Using data from the third wave of the American Portrait Survey, we find evidence that both the “silicon shield” and “silicon field” views coexist in Taiwan. Furthermore, they are polarized along partisan lines, reflecting divergent perceptions of U.S. and China. These findings highlight the significance of domestic political dynamics in shaping the intersection between international political economy and international security.

Keywords: economic peace theory, silicon shield, silicon field, partisan polarization.

2. One Step Forward, Three Steps Back in Democracy Promotion

Bann Seng Tan, Ashoka University, India

This paper identifies determinants of democratic promotion programs and the receivers’ assessments of them.

Abstract:

The success of democracy promotion by the West in the Indo-Pacific is dependent on the state of the Liberal International Order (LIO). Simply put, it is easier to promote democracy when the LIO is strong than when it is weak. The Russian-Ukraine war introduced systemic shocks that to some offers a prospect for the revitalization of the LIO. This paper examines the implications of the LIO revival thesis for democracy promotion. Despite some progress, I argue democrats should address three issues if democracy promotion is to be more effective in the Indo-Pacific. The first is a set of arguments by Adam Przeworski on the nature of authoritarian legitimacy and the proper demarcation of democracy. The second is the argument by Ghia Nodia that autocracy promotion is a misnomer as autocracy – and not democracy- is the default regime type. The third is the argument by Thomas Carothers that the West misdiagnosed the cause of the current spate of democratic backsliding as a failure to deliver effective policy. The collective implications of those three issues imply that the theory behind democracy promotion still has some way to go. One step forward, three steps back. (192 words)

Keywords: democracy promotion, autocracy promotion, performance legitimacy, liberal international order (LIO), regime type

3. Democracy, Trade and Security Partners in the Indo-Pacific

Chien-pin Li, Sam Houston State University, U.S.A.

This paper dwells on trade patterns among nations that are associated with the Indo-Pacific initiative or the BRI or both.

Abstract:

The geopolitical tensions in the Indo-Pacific have raised questions about the future of the political and economic order in the region. As the U.S.-China conflicts over trade and security intensify in recent years, it is imperative to evaluate the convergence of internal and external drivers in the region. How do domestic governance and regime dynamics interact with trade and investment flows and economic partnerships? And how do they affect alliance formation and security arrangements? The diverse types of political regimes in the Indo-Pacific offer rich insights into the broad spectrum of policy choices and provide empirical data for theoretical discussions of the interactions of ideas, institutions, and interests that shape the political and economic landscapes in the region.

Keywords: Indo-Pacific, democracy, authoritarianism, trade, investment, security