On September 19, 2026, American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) Director Raymond Greene attended the "International Forum on Whole-of-Society Defense Resilience" hosted by the Office of the President of Taiwan. Addressing the long-standing international concern regarding Taiwan’s energy security—specifically the debate over the number of days of liquefied natural gas (LNG) reserves—Greene offered a different perspective. He emphasized that the external focus on how many days Taiwan can sustain energy supplies during a crisis overlooks Taiwan's irreplaceable strategic role in the global economic system. Greene argued that the truly critical question is: "How long could the global economy continue to run at full speed if trade and commerce from Taiwan were absent?"

This argument elevates Taiwan’s strategic value from mere energy reserves to the core level of global supply chain resilience, creating a profound link to issues of stability in Southeast Asia and global trade.

According to reports from various media outlets, the core of Greene’s remarks lies in redefining Taiwan’s defense resilience within international geopolitics and economics. Multiple sources confirmed that Greene explicitly pointed out that international discourse regarding Taiwan’s energy reserves (such as 11 or 14 days) fails to fully define Taiwan’s survival capability in a potential crisis. Representatives from the UK and Europe at the forum offered corresponding views; while acknowledging Taiwan’s core position in the global supply chain, they also highlighted the structural vulnerability of Taiwan’s heavy reliance on energy imports and called on the Taiwan government to accelerate low-carbon transitions and deregulate relevant policies to strengthen overall economic resilience.

These perspectives collectively outline the complex challenges and international expectations Taiwan faces in its pursuit of economic stability and energy autonomy.

However, there are subtle differences in the focus of the information provided by various parties. Greene’s remarks focused on the "indispensability" of Taiwan in the global economic supply chain to counter external doubts about Taiwan’s defense capabilities, while the European and British representatives shifted the focus back to Taiwan’s internal "energy transition" and "regulatory environment." Furthermore, the question of "how long the global economy could function" remains a strategic hypothesis, with no specific economic models or quantitative data to support a concrete timeline. This indicates a gap in risk assessment standards among nations when discussing global supply chain resilience.

Additionally, details regarding how to specifically implement supply chain resilience to address regional conflicts remain subject to further policy discussions.

These remarks have profound implications for the Asia-Pacific region and global industrial chains. As an important link in the global supply chain, Southeast Asian nations have been actively seeking U.S. commitments and regional economic cooperation in recent years due to geopolitical risks and the expansion of China’s economic and military influence. Greene’s perspective reinforces Taiwan’s status as a supply chain hub, which is not only directly related to the stability of the semiconductor and high-tech industries but also affects the regional trade policy layouts of ASEAN countries. For Southeast Asian economies highly dependent on global trade, the stability of the Taiwanese supply chain directly impacts their manufacturing output and export momentum.

If the Taiwanese supply chain were to be interrupted, the global economy would face severe chain reactions, prompting Southeast Asian nations to re-examine their positioning in regional defense resilience.

Although Greene’s views have received support from some international observers, there are limitations to these perspectives. Some analyses point out that overemphasizing the criticality of the Taiwanese supply chain, while highlighting Taiwan’s strategic value, may also exacerbate regional tensions. Furthermore, viewing energy transition and deregulation as means to enhance resilience faces tug-of-wars among different interest groups in Taiwan regarding environmental protection, land use, and industrial policy; a single international forum statement should not be oversimplified as a panacea for all structural problems.

While pursuing supply chain resilience, countries must still consider the practical limitations of their own economic development to avoid the rise of trade protectionism caused by over-interpreting geopolitical risks, which could in turn affect overall regional economic integration.

Future observations will focus on how the Taiwan government responds to the suggestions from international representatives regarding energy transition and deregulation, and how the U.S. and ASEAN countries translate "supply chain resilience" into concrete policy collaboration in subsequent bilateral or multilateral trade negotiations. Furthermore, whether the international community’s assessment of Taiwan’s economic continuity in crisis scenarios will further evolve into substantive economic defense cooperation mechanisms will be a key indicator for the future direction of the global economy and trade. Observers will closely monitor how Taiwan balances the dual challenges of energy security and industrial development while maintaining its core position in the global supply chain.