ON THURSDAY, THE legislature passed the central government's annual budget for next year. The bill for the purchase of US PAC-3 missiles had been delayed by the 2004 referendum and could not be submitted again for three years, but the Ministry of National Defense has now proposed six new purchase packages totaling NT$21.9 billion (US$673.5 million).
Four packages were passed this time, while the other two remain frozen. The push to upgrade existing PAC-2 missiles will continue according to its budget plan.
As for the NT$5.4 billion budgeted for eight diesel submarines next year, the legislature reached a consensus and passed NT$2 billion of the budget and scrapped the rest.
Instead of boycotting the NT$3.8 billion budget for the mass production of Hsiung Feng II-E missiles, two-thirds of the frozen budget was passed -- enough to ensure stable technical development.
Although several parts of the arms budget have been deleted or frozen, these decisions still have significance for the development of Taiwan's national defense affairs.
Take the three major arms procurement plans that have been a source of controversy for several years for example.
The legislature agreed to budget NT$6.1 billion for the purchase of 12 Lockheed P-3C Orion Maritime Patrol aircraft last year, and it will approve NT$1.7 billion so the plan can continue next year.
The purchase of four packages of PAC-3 missiles that was recently passed has more political and psychological significance than actual defense capabilities, since two of the three major arms procurement plans have been passed.
As for the purchase of submarines, after the US agreed to the two-stage plan consisting of initial design evaluation and construction in June last year, Washington said that US$360 million (NT$11.7 billion) would be required for the three-year first stage.
The legislature merely passed one-sixth of the budget, but it could be seen as a confirmation of the plan and the first step toward the procurement of the submarines.
Although the NT$2 billion budget passed by the legislature is insufficient for the US Navy's submarine design, it is enough to allow the US military to send out RFPs (Request for Proposal) as a first step in the process of inviting and selecting business partners.
The ball is back in the US Navy's court now. The question of whether Taiwan's navy will be able to use these funds in negotiations with Washington to find ways to invite and select business partners and complete the initial design will be key in convincing the legislature to approve more funds by the end of next year.
After the US Navy sends out RFPs next year, any reaction by China and its impact on Taiwan-China-US relations will deserve our close attention.
The participation of well-known international submarine builders like Germany's HDW, France's DCN and the Netherlands' RDM in the bid may also bring Chinese pressure on EU states.
Regardless of the outcome of the presidential election in March, Taiwan will still be facing a military threat from China. The building of an effective defense capability and closer military exchanges and cooperation with the US and Japan will be beneficial to Taiwan's security.
Therefore, the more pragmatic approach is to set aside political ideologies and bring the issue back to matters of defense at a professional level.
Soong Hseik-wen is the director of the Graduate Institute of Strategy and International Affairs at National Chung Cheng University. Wang Jyh-perng is a student at the institute.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers