Letters:

Volunteer force won't work

Your editorial ("Thumbs up for a volunteer army," April 8, page 8) welcomed the introduction of an all-volunteer military for Taiwan by noting that the US made the transition to a professional force after Vietnam and that the US experience could serve as an example for Taiwan. As a former US Army officer -- and originally from Taiwan -- I think I am qualified to point out how, without certain changes, the idea of an all-volunteer force will not work in Taiwan.

First and foremost, there is no tradition of military service in Chinese society -- which has looked upon the warrior class as those who were not able to secure better employment or opportunities elsewhere. I vividly remember the proverb people would cite when they learned that I had been in the Army -- "Good iron isn't used to make nails and good men don't become soldiers" (好鐵不打釘, 好男不當兵).

In contrast, most Americans respect West Point cadets to the point of nearly revering them. In Taiwan, people look down on military academy cadets as kids who couldn't get into a real college. That kind of cultural bias will fundamentally doom any idea of a volunteer force. Quality people don't gravitate toward professions, especially physically challenging ones, which are not respected.

Second, institutionally, Taiwanese society and education do not breed young men interested in the physical rigors of military service. Secondary education focuses on book-learning and very little on the practical applications of life. Young Taiwanese lack outdoor and physical-education skills and for the most part lack interest in the essential building blocks to good soldiering such as outdoorsmanship, hunting, survival skills, athletics, etc.

From what I can tell, unless it helps them on their college entrance exams, young Taiwan-ese are reluctant to join organizations such as the Boy Scouts, Civil Air Patrol or the Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps. I have even heard of high schools forgoing classes in physical education in favor of additional study periods.

Finally, and perhaps this is the most sensitive issue of all, Chinese society doesn't instill in its youth a sense of public or national service. Chinese culture stresses the individual looking out for oneself first before making a sacrifice for others. Parents in Taiwan are more concerned with their kids securing high-earning jobs in a white-collar industry than in sectors such as public service.

For the most part, the people who go into government and public service in Taiwan do so to enrich themselves first and serve the people second. Very few parents push their kids toward a career in public service unless it is one that would lead to power and monetary rewards.

Military service won't make one rich, but in exchange for reduced pay, soldiers get a sense they are defending a greater good and derive satisfaction from the selfless service they are providing to their nation. Unfortunately, these values are not very highly regarded in Taiwan.

We have all heard that young people in Taiwan lack direction and that they are more interested in living the good life now rather than in working hard as their parents did. In short, many are spoiled and focus solely on materialism.

I would agree that military service in Taiwan needs to be reformed, if young men are feeling that they are wasting time while in uniform. How-ever, what a wonderful opportunity for our society to instill in the young people the value of public and selfless service to the nation. I bet that if the Taiwan-ese valued military service, then the scions of the privileged such as KMT Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) or PFP Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) would also serve.

At the very least, they would be looked down upon as something less than real men for cowardly using their influence to avoid service to the nation. If we placed enough scorn on those who dodge the draft, then perhaps these privileged children would at least be shamed into putting on an uniform.

Ryan J. Shih
California

Trust the public

Ironically, while a lot of people, including the communist leaders in Beijing, are second-guessing whether the US is considering shifting its Taiwan policy, the Taiwanese themselves are too timid to voice their true feelings.

A plebiscite championed by the DPP's Trong Chai (蔡同榮) can only be considered to be tabled after Chai agreed to have the most important clauses -- the political one -- removed. The KMT and the PFP have reasoned that by including the so-called sensitive political clauses, such as allowing the people to change the name of the country, the bill will antagonize the public.

That may well be, but doesn't the risk of making a difficult decision rest on the shoulders of the nation's real decision makers -- the people? That is what a referendum is all about.

The people of Taiwan must be given the opportunity to enjoy and exercise complete democracy. And yes, it comes with a price. Unless the price is right, the people would not take it. Trust the wisdom of the people, please.

James Chou
Canada

Misplaced criticism

Wang Shih-chien's (王世堅) criticism of Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) seems quite retarded in terms of logic ("Councilor shaking his head over Ma's ecstasy crackdown," April 9, page 1).

If Wang really thinks Ma can completely rid Taipei of ecstasy, he ought to look to his own party, ie, the DPP's inability to deal with the problem of the drug entering Taiwan in the first place. They are the government in charge, aren't they?

Does Wang think Ma should set up road blocks on all the thousands of roads entering Taipei and search all cars entering the city? Or is this just a cheap excuse to have a crack at Ma by politicizing the issue?

Ashley Hines
Taipei