Disaster Resilience, Sovereignty, and the 2024 Hualien Earthquake

Investments in disaster risk reduction can save lives, property, and livelihoods. As the aftermath of the 2024 Hualien earthquake shows, they can also protect sovereignty in an increasingly disaster-prone world.

On 3 April 2024, a magnitude 7.4 earthquake struck the east cost of Taiwan near the city of Hualien. To date it appears to have caused fewer than 20 deaths, although thousands were injured and significant property damage was recorded. Emergency management experts and international media have been quick to compare the Hualien earthquake with previous disasters (such as the 1999 Jiji earthquake, which caused over 2,000 deaths) as evidence that investments in improved building standards, early warning systems, and public education can save lives, property, and money.

The Hualien earthquake was an international crisis averted. A multinational response, with fleets of ships bearing emergency supplies and airports, crowded with teams of foreign first responders, did not occur. This does not mean that the earthquake was not an international event. In a crowded news cycle, serious natural disasters thrust communities and their governments into the global spotlight. How authorities and communities respond is inevitably scrutinised by an international audience. Taipei’s furious reaction to Bolivia’s expression of solidarity with the People’s Republic of China following the earthquake is a reminder that international affairs were a consideration for authorities during the response.

By investing in disaster risk reduction, authorities in Taipei not only spared their community and economy the catastrophic consequences of a major disaster, they also bought themselves room to manoeuvre in the international spotlight during the earthquake’s aftermath. This means more than simply being lauded by the global emergency management community. The options Taipei created, and the decisions it made, offer lessons for other jurisdictions jealous of their sovereignty in an increasingly disaster-prone world.

Sovereignty means being able to say no…

Natural disasters can pose a threat to state sovereignty when there is a gap between capability and need. A government faced with a disaster that is beyond domestic capacity must choose between an incomplete response and seeking external support. Both options can challenge state authority and, in extreme cases, the challenge can prove existential. The 2010 earthquake in Haiti, for instance, caused an “implosion of the state apparatus,” with dire consequences for the country’s already precarious sovereignty.

Disasters do not have to be catastrophic to prompt concerns about sovereignty. Disaster-prone Indonesia makes a point of rejecting international aid for this reason. The Indonesian Government accepted international support following the 2018 Sulawesi earthquake and tsunami, but reversed course and asked independent foreign aid workers to leave the country less than two weeks later.

Poor or weak governments, confronted by devastating disasters in some of the world’s most vulnerable countries, may have little choice but to cede control of their emergency management and recovery activities to foreign governments or international non-governmental organisations. By investing in disaster risk reduction and emergency management capabilities, governments build domestic capacity and reduce the size of required response and recovery efforts. This allows them to manage more events by deploying domestic resources or relying on a small number of preferred international partners.

This is exactly what investments in disaster risk reduction achieved in the aftermath of the Hualien earthquake. By reducing the need arising from physical damage and loss of life, Taipei was able to forestall or decline most offers of international assistance. Hours after the earthquake struck, the Taiwan Affairs Office of the People’s Republic of China extended an offer of disaster relief assistance that was quickly rebuffed by Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council. This was a rerun of a similar exchanges following previous earthquakes.

If the 2024 earthquake had inflicted more damage, it may have been more difficult for Taipei to decline. Taiwan would probably never accept an offer of assistance from Beijing if there was an alternative, but saying “no” is easier when the need is less. Taipei also avoided the need to seek substantive assistance from partners such as the United States, which could have created unwelcome diplomatic friction between Washington and Beijing.

…and being able to say yes

Taipei did not decline all offers of aid. Less than one week after the Mainland Affairs Council publicly rejected the offer of assistance from the Taiwan Affairs Office, Japanese authorities announced US$1 million in aid through the Japan-Taiwan Exchange Association. This was followed by a US$500,000 donation from South Korea, as well as smaller donations from Thailand, Lithuania, and the Czech Republic. While undoubtedly welcome, these donations are of limited material importance. Together, they come to less than 0.5 percent of the funding allocated for relief and recovery activities by the Taiwanese Cabinet (at least US$614.9 million).

International disaster aid is a form of disaster diplomacy, providing opportunities for countries to build relationships and foster public goodwill. Given Taiwan’s contested international position, the implicit recognition and public demonstrations of solidarity from key regional partners is valuable. By investing in disaster risk reduction, Taipei has created an environment in which it can accept this largely symbolic assistance, reaping the diplomatic benefits without having to negotiate the conditions that might attend larger contributions.

Countries can also avoid questions about sovereignty by accepting aid reciprocally. Well-resourced governments recognised as international leaders make use of these arrangements. These can be formalised, like the arrangements for sharing firefighting resources between Australia, Canada, and the United States. Alternatively, they can be ad hoc, like the deployment of a team of Turkish earthquake recovery experts to Taiwan after the 2024 event. Media reporting in Taiwan highlighted that the Turkish team was the only foreign support deployed on the ground, and that the assistance was offered in return for a Taiwanese team dispatched to Türkiye following the February 2023 earthquake in Kahramanmaraş. By receiving Turkish assistance, Taipei deepened a relationship of mutual benefit that creates opportunities for both countries to offer and accept support from positions of strength after future disasters.

Resilience and sovereignty

Investment in disaster risk reduction does not eliminate the risk of disaster events, but it can reduce their frequency and the size of the response and recovery task. This increases the number of events that can be managed with domestic resources, and increases the chance that disasters that exceed domestic capabilities can be managed effectively with the aid of a small number of preferred partners who can be persuaded to provide support on favourable terms.

It would be a mistake to read too much into Beijing’s offer of assistance following the 2024 Hualien earthquake, or in Taipei’s decision to decline. Both sides were following the usual playbook, and Taiwan had no need for support. But the earthquake is a reminder that decisions about when to accept disaster aid, and from whom, can be an important way for governments to exercise control in the face of otherwise uncontrollable circumstances. Investments in resilience not only protect lives and property; in an environment of escalating disaster risks they also safeguard the sovereignty of the state itself.

Christopher Heard is a disaster risk reduction and emergency management policy expert, with a particular interest in disaster risk finance and governance. He studied economics at Northwestern University and the University of Queensland and is based in Hobart, Tasmania.

This article is published under a Creative Commons License and may be republished with attribution.