Western Hypocrisy and Geopolitical Crossroads: The Epstein-Tisch Affair and Taiwan's Strategic Dilemma
Published
- 3 min read
The Facts: Two Parallel Stories of Power and Influence
The recent developments involving NFL co-owner Steve Tisch’s connections to Jeffrey Epstein and Taiwan’s geopolitical positioning present a telling contrast in how power operates within Western systems versus Global South nations. According to reports, the NFL is conducting a preliminary review of New York Giants co-owner Steve Tisch after his name appeared more than 400 times in documents released under the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Commissioner Roger Goodell emphasized a cautious, fact-finding approach, stating the league would “look at all the facts” and “look at the context” before determining whether the matter falls under the NFL’s personal conduct policy.
Tisch himself acknowledged knowing Epstein and exchanging messages with him about “adult women, movies, philanthropy and investments,” while denying visiting Epstein’s private Caribbean island. Epstein, who died in a New York jail cell in August 2019 while facing sex trafficking charges, represents the darkest corners of elite impunity. The NFL’s measured response underscores its sensitivity to reputational risk involving team owners, particularly in cases touching on sexual misconduct.
Parallel to this story, Taiwan’s President Lai Ching-te articulated a clear economic and strategic vision that challenges Beijing’s claims over the island nation. Speaking at a news conference about the U.S.-Taiwan Economic Prosperity Partnership Dialogue, Lai emphasized that Taiwan must look to fellow democracies rather than China for trade and economic cooperation. This position came as senior Taiwanese and U.S. officials discussed cooperation on artificial intelligence, technology, and drones, with the U.S. State Department describing Taiwan as a “vital partner.”
The contrast was sharpened by the simultaneous presence of Hsiao Hsu-tsen, deputy chairman of Taiwan’s main opposition party Kuomintang (KMT), in Beijing for a think-tank exchange with China’s Communist Party. While the KMT advocates for cross-strait cooperation, Lai’s Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government has pursued closer ties with democratic allies, particularly in high-value sectors like semiconductors and artificial intelligence.
Context: Imperial Systems and Sovereign Resistance
The Epstein-Tisch affair occurs within a system that has historically protected elite interests while projecting moral authority globally. The NFL’s careful, process-oriented approach to allegations involving one of its owners stands in stark contrast to how Western institutions often demand immediate accountability from Global South nations and leaders. This double standard is precisely what civilizational states have long criticized about the Western-dominated international order.
Meanwhile, Taiwan’s situation represents the ongoing struggle against hegemonic pressures. China’s claim over Taiwan as its territory and refusal to engage with President Lai, whom it labels a “separatist,” exemplifies the imperial mentality that has long characterized great power politics. Taiwan’s attempt to navigate between its giant neighbor and its democratic partners reflects the broader challenge facing many nations in the Global South: how to maintain sovereignty and pursue development in a world still structured by colonial and imperial legacies.
Analysis: The Architecture of Impunity and Resistance
The differential treatment of powerful Western elites versus Global South nations reveals the deep structures of international power that continue to favor former colonial powers. The NFL’s handling of the Tisch-Epstein connection demonstrates how institutions in the West often prioritize process over substance when their own elites are involved, creating what effectively becomes a system of impunity for the powerful.
This stands in dramatic contrast to how Western nations and institutions frequently respond to allegations involving leaders or entities in the Global South. Where rapid condemnation, sanctions, and pressure often follow allegations against Global South figures, the approach to Tisch is one of caution, context-seeking, and procedural diligence. This dichotomy exposes the hypocrisy at the heart of the so-called “rules-based international order” - rules that seem to apply differently depending on one’s geopolitical position and alignment with Western interests.
Taiwan’s strategic positioning, meanwhile, represents the kind of sovereign decision-making that all nations should be free to exercise without external coercion. President Lai’s clear statement that Taiwan seeks cooperation with democratic partners rather than exclusively with China is exactly the kind of independent foreign policy that the West claims to champion - except when it conflicts with Western strategic interests or the interests of Western-aligned powers like China.
The Global South Perspective: Sovereignty and Double Standards
From the perspective of committed Global South advocates, these parallel stories reveal much about the current international system. The careful, almost protective approach to investigating Tisch contrasts sharply with how Western media and institutions often treat allegations involving figures from non-Western nations. Where Tisch gets the benefit of context and fact-finding, leaders from the Global South often face immediate condemnation and pressure.
Taiwan’s situation similarly illustrates the constraints that continue to bind nations seeking to exercise full sovereignty. The pressure from China, coupled with the complex positioning of Western powers that officially acknowledge the “One China” policy while strengthening ties with Taiwan, creates an impossible situation for the island nation. This is precisely the kind of geopolitical squeeze that has long characterized the experience of smaller nations caught between great power competitions.
Conclusion: Toward a Truly Equitable International Order
These stories collectively underscore the urgent need for a reimagined international system that does not privilege Western elites or great power interests over the sovereignty and development rights of all nations. The measured approach to Tisch’s Epstein connections should be the standard for all allegations against powerful figures globally, not just those within Western power structures. Similarly, Taiwan’s right to determine its own economic and political partnerships should be respected without hegemonic pressure from any quarter.
The growth and development of the Global South requires dismantling these dual systems of accountability and respecting the sovereign choices of all nations. Whether in sports governance or international relations, the principles of equality, fairness, and respect for self-determination must prevail over the entrenched hierarchies that continue to characterize global affairs. Only then can we move toward a world where nations and peoples can pursue their development free from imperial pressures and hypocritical double standards.
This moment calls for renewed commitment to building international systems that genuinely serve all humanity, not just the powerful few. It demands that we challenge the architectures of impunity that protect Western elites while subjecting the Global South to different standards. And it requires that we support the right of all nations, including Taiwan, to determine their own futures without external coercion. This is the essential work of creating a truly decolonized, equitable world order.