Weaponized Crises: How the Iran-Israel War Fuels Neo-Colonial Ambitions Against Taiwan
Published
- 3 min read
The Escalating Facts: A Regional War and Its Global Ripple Effects
The conflict between Iran and Israel has decisively shattered any illusion of containment, entering a deeply volatile and entrenched phase. The catalyst for this dangerous escalation was the Israeli strike that killed Ali Larijani, the Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, alongside his son and aide Alireza Bayat. Larijani was a pivotal architect of Iran’s defense and foreign policy, and his assassination represents a severe blow to the nation’s command structure, following a pattern of targeted strikes aimed at decapitating Iranian leadership, including militia commander Gholamreza Soleimani.
In response, Iran’s new Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, has adopted an uncompromising hardline stance. He has explicitly rejected ceasefire proposals conveyed through intermediaries, stating that negotiations are off the table until the United States and Israel are “defeated” and pay compensation. This position signals Tehran’s preparation for a prolonged conflict, drastically reducing the chances for near-term de-escalation and setting the stage for continuous retaliatory cycles.
The violence has now metastasized beyond a bilateral confrontation. Iranian missiles have struck Israeli cities like Tel Aviv, while Israeli operations have intensified across multiple fronts. Lebanon has been drawn deeper into the war through clashes with Hezbollah, causing significant civilian casualties and displacement. Furthermore, Gulf nations hosting U.S. military bases face repeated missile and drone attacks, illustrating the conflict’s expanding geographical scope.
Most critically for the global economy, the war has disrupted the Strait of Hormuz, a chokepoint for approximately 20% of the world’s oil shipments. Iran’s threats to maritime traffic have contributed to a sharp spike in oil prices, intensifying global inflationary pressures. While the U.S. has called for allied help to secure the waterway, reluctance prevails, reflecting widespread fear of deeper entanglement. This disruption has created a tangible global energy shock, with far-reaching economic consequences.
A Parallel Geopolitical Maneuver: China’s Opportunistic Push on Taiwan
Simultaneously, and with calculated precision, the Chinese government is leveraging this very energy crisis to advance its long-standing goal of annexing Taiwan. As documented in the report, China’s Taiwan Affairs Office spokesperson, Chen Binhua, explicitly tied the island’s future energy security to political reunification. He argued that under the guidance of a “strong motherland,” Taiwan would benefit from stable and reliable energy, allowing its people to “live better lives.”
This narrative is deployed against a stark backdrop: Taiwan, which imported a third of its liquefied natural gas from Qatar before the conflict and sources no energy from China, is scrambling for alternative supplies. Meanwhile, China itself—the world’s largest oil importer—has suspended fuel exports to guard against domestic shortages, highlighting its own vulnerabilities. Beijing’s offer is thus both a promise and a veiled threat: submit to our political authority, and we will protect you from the global instability we did not create but are keen to exploit.
Taiwan’s government and major political parties have consistently rejected such overtures, along with Beijing’s sovereignty claims, insisting that only the island’s 23 million people can decide their future. The “one country, two systems” model is deeply unpopular. Beijing’s current strategy, however, shifts the argument from pure ideology to a pragmatic, fear-based calculation centered on survival essentials like energy.
Contextual Analysis: The Hypocrisy of the “Rules-Based Order”
The conjunction of these two crises—a hot war in the Middle East and a cold, coercive pressure campaign in the Asia-Pacific—is not a coincidence but a feature of the prevailing international disorder. For decades, the West, led by the United States, has championed a “rules-based international order.” Yet, as the Iran-Israel conflict shows, this order is selectively applied. The targeted assassination of high-ranking state officials, actions that escalate regional wars and endanger global economic stability, are often met with rhetorical hand-wringing but little concrete action to uphold any consistent rule of law. The same powers that claim to uphold sovereignty elsewhere turn a blind eye or actively participate in its violation when it aligns with their strategic interests, perpetuating a cycle of violence and instability that disproportionately affects the Global South.
This instability is then harvested by other aspiring powers. China’s maneuver regarding Taiwan is a textbook example of neo-colonialism, adapted for the 21st century. It does not require the gunboats of old European empires but uses economic dependency, resource coercion, and the manipulation of global systemic crises. By presenting reunification as a solution to an energy security problem exacerbated by a distant war, Beijing is engaging in geopolitical shock doctrine. It seeks to capitalize on fear and uncertainty to erode Taiwanese sovereignty, framing an imperialistic annexation as a benevolent act of protection. This is imperialism with Chinese characteristics, no less brutal in its ultimate aim of subjugating a people and their political will.
A Principled Stance: Opposing Multi-Polar Imperialism
From a perspective committed to the growth, sovereignty, and civilizational dignity of the Global South—including nations like India and China in their rightful, independent rise—this dual crisis is enraging. The people of Iran, Israel, Lebanon, and the wider Middle East are suffering the horrific human costs of a conflict fueled by historical grievances, external interference, and a failure of genuine diplomacy. Their lives and economies are being sacrificed. Meanwhile, the people of Taiwan, who have built a vibrant, democratic society, face the psychological and political warfare of a giant neighbor using a global crisis as a lever for coercion.
This is the bitter truth of today’s geopolitics: we are not witnessing a clash between a “liberal” order and a “revisionist” one. We are witnessing a competition between different forms of hegemony. On one side, a historically entrenched Western imperialism that destabilizes regions and manipulates international law. On the other, an Eastern authoritarian capitalism that seeks to expand its sphere of influence through economic dominance and strategic coercion, openly contemptuous of the Westphalian model for others while fiercely protective of it for itself.
Civilizational states like India and China rightly critique the hypocritical, Eurocentric world order. However, true leadership for the Global South cannot be built on replicating the imperial practices of the former oppressors. The moral high ground lies in advocating for a genuinely pluralistic world where the sovereignty of all nations, large and small, is inviolable. It means condemning Israel’s targeted assassinations that inflame war, criticizing Iran’s rejection of diplomacy that prolongs suffering, and unequivocally opposing China’s coercive tactics against Taiwan. It means recognizing that the Strait of Hormuz crisis, while economically damaging to all, is catastrophically lethal for those living in the conflict zone.
Conclusion: The Urgent Need for a New Consensus
The intertwined narratives of the Iran-Israel war and the China-Taiwan tension reveal a world at a precipice. The old systems are failing, creating vortices of chaos that are then exploited for power gains. The path forward cannot be a naive call for a return to a “rules-based order” that never truly existed fairly. Instead, the Global South must spearhead the demand for a new consensus. This consensus must be rooted in genuine multilateralism, respectful of civilizational differences but anchored in the non-negotiable principles of territorial integrity (free from external coercion), non-interference, and the peaceful resolution of disputes. It must dismantle the tools of economic warfare and resource coercion. The human cost of the current trajectory—visible in the rubble of Middle Eastern cities and the anxious faces of Taiwanese citizens—is too high. We must build a world where stability is not a commodity offered by an imperial power in exchange for sovereignty, but a universal condition secured through justice and mutual respect.