On February 20, 2025, Taiwan’s public policy interests and Taiwan think tanks, among other organizations, jointly held a symposium on the topic of “From the Cold War to Information Warfare: How Democratic Countries Should Respond to Information Warfare from Authoritarian States,” inviting scholars and experts to analyze the issue.
The moderator, Assistant Professor Chen Fangyu from the Department of Political Science at Soochow University, stated, “Information warfare has always existed, and the threat from authoritarian states to democratic Taiwan has never ceased. We must understand ourselves and our adversaries in order to win this ever-evolving war of technology.”
Guo Meicen, Director of Polling and Public Opinion Center at Taiwan Think Tank, pointed out that information warfare has become an important component of modern warfare. As a highly digitalized society, Taiwan must take this silent yet deadly attack seriously. She cited the example of the 2008 Russia-Georgia war, where attacks were not solely based on traditional military methods but also utilized cyber warfare, disinformation campaigns, and psychological warfare to cripple the opponent before actual combat.
Guo Meicen further analyzed that during the Russo-Ukrainian War, a large amount of false information spread, such as the misinformation that “Ukrainian President Zelensky had fled the country,” aiming to influence international opinions and weaken the morale of the Ukrainian people. She warned that if similar tactics were applied to the Taiwan Strait situation, it would pose a serious challenge to Taiwan’s social stability and international support.
Furthermore, the event also discussed the impact of fake news, social media influencing public opinion, and Deepfake technology on democratic societies. Guo Meicen stated that information warfare not only occurs during times of war but also seeps into everyday life, affecting people’s perceptions of political, media, and social issues. Therefore, enhancing media literacy and strengthening digital defense capabilities have become essential topics for every Taiwanese citizen.
Yurenqing, a senior analyst at Taiwan Democracy Lab, explained that information warfare can be divided into hardware and software aspects, with hardware including hacker attacks and spectrum interference, while cognitive warfare is a common form of software information warfare. Cognitive warfare corresponds to the Chinese military’s “public opinion warfare,” spreading messages via media and social platforms that blur the lines between truth and falsehood, influencing the Taiwanese people’s perception of the government, specific individuals, and democratic values.
Yurenqing bluntly stated that the Chinese Communist Party and Russia utilize cyber armies, false information, Deepfake technology, and other tools to launch cognitive warfare against democratic countries. They aim not only to shape international opinions but also to sow discord in the social fabric of democratic countries, eroding trust in governments and media, making the scale and impact of information warfare far surpass previous levels.
Yurenqing suggested, “We should enhance media literacy and have government agencies establish platforms to counter foreign information manipulation, collaborating with other democratic countries to combat information warfare together.”
Hu Huan, Director of International Affairs at Taiwan Fact-Checking Center, stated that information warfare is comprehensive and increasingly sophisticated. When combating false information, it is not enough to just publish fact-check reports and results; it is crucial to collaborate with platforms like Meta, Google, and other countries’ fact-checking centers to learn from each other and swiftly counter information warfare.
Researcher Chen Xianan of Taiwan Think Tank supplemented that a hybrid model of information warfare, involving both hardware and software aspects, had appeared during Taiwan’s elections. At that time, a certain media website’s backend was hacked, disseminating false news about a random stabbing incident at a polling station in Tainan, aiming to create chaos and influence voting intentions.
Chen Xianan’s analysis highlighted the similarities in the narratives of false information spread by different authoritarian states. For instance, Russia would start from vague historical sentiments, creating arguments resembling “territories that have been inseparable since ancient times” to legitimize its invasion of Ukraine. It is worth studying and learning from these tactics, with democratic countries being able to draw insights and collaborate with each other.
After the panel discussion, the moderator and young participants raised questions regarding the “counterattack in information warfare” and “disinformation packaged as commentary,” with the panelists providing in-depth analysis and responses to each inquiry.