In his nomination acceptance speech at the National Democratic Convention, US Senator John Kerry emphasized that he would only go to war if faced with "a threat that was real and imminent." He said he "will be a commander-in-chief who will never mislead us into war" and that "the United States of America never goes to war because we want to, we only go to war because we have to." I believe that Kerry's words prove that military thinking and military ethics are intricately linked with the stability of national security and the strategic situation.
The book Military Ethics published by the US's National Defense University pointed out that the American Catholic Bishop's Pastoral, in their discussion of the 1983 made-for-television film Day After Tomorrow indicated that many American people were concerned about issues related to the ethics of armed conflict.
In the aftermath of the recent military exercises by China, Taiwan and the US, it is important that we raise the issue of the ethics of conflict. We should also consider preventive defense, which consists of "softer" strategic options and provides a basis for reducing military tensions, by dispelling the increasingly dense atmosphere of imminent conflict to avoid an unintended conflagration.
Military Ethics emphasizes the deep strategic thinking behind the idea that soldiers who hold a position and await orders are also making a contribution. It expounds the value of a strong defensive stance and preventive action. It goes on to point out that the reason that the military exists is to protect the nation and prevent it from becoming a victim of the threats of its enemies.
We can see from its arguments that the US National Defense University sees the job of the military as guaranteeing peaceful development and stability. It proposes the idea that peace stems from restraint. Restraint is a form of endurance and self-discipline, but it is usually regarded as being "soft." In the past, soldiers have created an impression of fierceness and strength, but what we want to emphasize now is a restraint that serves people rather than brings them into conflict.
Military Ethics also points out that the reason the military is given the absolute right to use major weapons by society is because it can only use this force under conditions of the greatest restraint, and that the use of force must be preceded by the correct procedures and oversight. "Peace" is therefore a precondition for "using military force," which should only be used to give a guarantee of peace.
Peace and military action support each other. For without a foundation of peace, any conflict can bring on terrible dangers which will extend into the future. The results of the second Iraq war gives us a clear indication of what can happen without such a foundation.
It is better to avoid conflict than to seek it. Lightly starting a conflict is something that strategists have always sought to avoid, as they know it is unwise and likely to have bad results. Former US secretary of defense William Perry is a proponent of "preventive defense," which he regards as being analogous to preventive medicine. Preventive medicine supports health and preempts dangerous developments. Preventive defense seeks out defensive opportunities prior to any threat to US national security maturing, and maintaining the security of the US by avoiding crisis situations.
Taiwan is a small country with a large population and it has few strategic options. The government should inculcate the idea that "prevention is better than cure," and it should create space to maneuver by showing goodwill to all, establishing the idea of "seeking battle only after the victory has been won" and keeping the conflict outside the country. In this way it can achieve the strategic goals of prevention and restraint.
The nation's geographical location and conditions means that it has a certain strategic value and importance. In the face of the constantly changing international situation and the tricky nature of cross-strait relations, we should use preventive defense to peacefully resolve problems in their early stages, making use of "soft" national security strategies to open up international maneuverability and avoid any crisis that might give rise to conflict. This is the proper way to proceed.
In this age of advanced technology and information, military ethics and preventive defense are not rarified concepts which few can follow, nor do they ignore the current international scene. Their main purpose is to emphasize the importance of soft strategies of peace, ethics, restraint and prevention.
This can serve as a platform to achieve the ancient human ideals of ending war. And it is something to contemplate for China, the US and Taiwan -- who in their recent military exercises have been intent on confrontation and competition.
Li Hua-chiu is a part-time researcher with the National Policy Foundation.
Translated by Ian Bartholomew
In the past month, two important developments are poised to equip Taiwan with expanded capabilities to play foreign policy offense in an age where Taiwan’s diplomatic space is seriously constricted by a hegemonic Beijing. Taiwan Foreign Minister Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍) led a delegation of Taiwan and US companies to the Philippines to promote trilateral economic cooperation between the three countries. Additionally, in the past two weeks, Taiwan has placed chip export controls on South Africa in an escalating standoff over the placing of its diplomatic mission in Pretoria, causing the South Africans to pause and ask for consultations to resolve
An altercation involving a 73-year-old woman and a younger person broke out on a Taipei MRT train last week, with videos of the incident going viral online, sparking wide discussions about the controversial priority seats and social norms. In the video, the elderly woman, surnamed Tseng (曾), approached a passenger in a priority seat and demanded that she get up, and after she refused, she swung her bag, hitting her on the knees and calves several times. In return, the commuter asked a nearby passenger to hold her bag, stood up and kicked Tseng, causing her to fall backward and
In December 1937, Japanese troops captured Nanjing and unleashed one of the darkest chapters of the 20th century. Over six weeks, hundreds of thousands were slaughtered and women were raped on a scale that still defies comprehension. Across Asia, the Japanese occupation left deep scars. Singapore, Malaya, the Philippines and much of China endured terror, forced labor and massacres. My own grandfather was tortured by the Japanese in Singapore. His wife, traumatized beyond recovery, lived the rest of her life in silence and breakdown. These stories are real, not abstract history. Here is the irony: Mao Zedong (毛澤東) himself once told visiting
When I reminded my 83-year-old mother on Wednesday that it was the 76th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China, she replied: “Yes, it was the day when my family was broken.” That answer captures the paradox of modern China. To most Chinese in mainland China, Oct. 1 is a day of pride — a celebration of national strength, prosperity and global stature. However, on a deeper level, it is also a reminder to many of the families shattered, the freedoms extinguished and the lives sacrificed on the road here. Seventy-six years ago, Chinese Communist leader Mao Zedong (毛澤東)
RSS