In October last year, Transparency International published its most recent Government Defense Integrity Index, which covers 20 countries in the Middle East, West Africa and North Africa.
One of the assessed nations received an overall grade of “D,” which indicates a high degree of defense corruption risk and the other 19 received either an “E” or an “F,” suggesting very high or critical risk levels.
The organization said that the high level of defense corruption risk in these countries threatens security and stability in their region.
Close observation over the past few years has shown that to live up to Taiwan’s own requirements on national defense integrity, high-level military officers — including the vice minister of national defense in charge of military administration and the administrative deputy ministers of national defense — must personally lead the units under assessment in joint reviews based on the criteria formulated by Transparency International.
Gradually, Taiwan is implementing the standards promoted by Transparency International, from compiling teaching materials on national defense integrity in pursuit of building a solid foundation to holding annual international conferences on national defense integrity in the hope of enhancing five main areas: political risk, financial risk, personnel risk, operations risk and procurement risk.
A few cases of misconduct still occur every year, but in terms of general national security-related governance, this small number does not pose a threat to overall military discipline.
The public and media should not take every opportunity to smear the military’s reputation, nor should the military authorities be overcautious and escalate control procedures at all levels or increase trivial paperwork for minor individual cases of misconduct. This would only increase the administrative burden of military personnel across every level. Truly working to uphold integrity is about full compliance with every rule in international standards.
In June 2018, Transparency International initiated an accountability program to promote the global Standards for Responsible Defense Governance. These guidelines stress that integrity must start with government and that monitoring should be improved through cooperation with civic organizations, beginning with technical aspects, with the items being evaluated.
This is also what the Ministry of National Defense is doing right now in its assessment of the Government Defense Integrity Index. The ministry’s efforts received high international praise in 2013 and 2015, when Taiwan ranked in the Government Defense Anti-Corruption Index’s “Band B,” which indicates a low risk of corruption.
As the year unfolds, in addition to hoping that the nation will receive high marks in this year’s index, there is also a sincere hope that other government departments and agencies will follow the Ministry of National Defense’s example and work hard to implement the system of integrity in government agencies and incrementally bring the government forward toward true accountability at levels. From the public’s perspective, this whole effort is already a success.
Tsao Yao-chun is a researcher with Transparency International Chinese Taipei and an external expert on anti-corruption index evaluations of governments at the Ministry of National Defense.
Translated by Chang Ho-ming
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with