Independence advocates on Monday gathered outside the Legislative Yuan in Taipei to demand that Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Charles Chen (陳以信) and KMT Taipei City Councilor Hsu Chiao-hsin (徐巧芯) move forward on their proposal to amend the Military Service Act (兵役法) to require that women be subject to mandatory military service.
Taiwan Republic Office director Chilly Chen (陳峻涵), who attended the rally, said that female conscription would benefit gender-equality efforts and bolster the military.
The issue has been discussed for decades, and there are inevitably always arguments on both sides of whether conscription of women is sexist or whether it would improve gender equality.
An ETtoday poll conducted in October last year showed that about half of male and female respondents supported gender-neutral conscription.
There are already women in the military, including female pilots who are trained to fly each of the country’s main fighter jets. Given that women have the choice of serving in the military, and their participation appears to be largely welcome, how would female conscription improve gender equality?
Swiss politician Chantal Gallade has said that male-only conscription is discriminatory to both sexes, and in February 2019, a US federal judge in Texas ruled that male-only conscription was unconstitutional given that former restrictions in the US on female military service no longer apply.
Men in Taiwan and South Korea have often raised the issue of conscription in discussing gender equality, saying that women do not understand certain issues because they have not served in the military. However, frequent reports of sexual harassment in the Israeli military — where women are included in the draft — suggest that female conscription would not automatically end discriminatory behavior.
Groups such as the Norwegian Association for Women’s Rights have also opposed the idea that female conscription would improve gender equality.
“Gender equality implies first and foremost that women and men should have the same human rights and fundamental freedoms ... but women and men do not have to be alike or do the same things to be equal,” the International Alliance of Women wrote in a newsletter last year.
In South Korea, many women have expressed a desire to see female conscription enacted.
“We need to fight together, men and women. If there’s a war, we can’t just stay home and live in fear,” a student at a girls’ high school in Seoul was quoted as saying in a Sept. 18, 2017, Washington Post article.
Another student, at a private university in Seoul, said that “women lack a basic understanding of the country’s military and defense system because the draft applies only to men,” adding that she wanted women drafted and subject to training that is appropriate for them.
“Women have the same or even better abilities than men,” the article said, citing comments from South Korean women. “Shouldn’t that mean women, like men, should serve the country and receive the same compensation and benefits from the government?”
The Ministry of National Defense on Tuesday said it was expanding the scope of reserve forces to counter the increasing threat from China. It stands to reason that including female reservists would greatly benefit those efforts. There is also an argument that as equal citizens of the country, women have an equal responsibility for its defense.
Greater female participation in the military warrants more discussion, but that discussion must address protecting women from harassment and discrimination, and adapting training to take account of the physical and intellectual abilities of all conscripts — male and female. Lawmakers should deliberate the issue with the assistance of experts, and invite public participation through a referendum.
In the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
In a stark reminder of China’s persistent territorial overreach, Pema Wangjom Thongdok, a woman from Arunachal Pradesh holding an Indian passport, was detained for 18 hours at Shanghai Pudong Airport on Nov. 24 last year. Chinese immigration officials allegedly informed her that her passport was “invalid” because she was “Chinese,” refusing to recognize her Indian citizenship and claiming Arunachal Pradesh as part of South Tibet. Officials had insisted that Thongdok, an Indian-origin UK resident traveling for a conference, was not Indian despite her valid documents. India lodged a strong diplomatic protest, summoning the Chinese charge d’affaires in Delhi and demanding
Immediately after the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) “Justice Mission” exercise at the end of last year, a question was posed to Indian Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal regarding recent developments involving the exercises around Taiwan, and how he viewed their impact on regional peace and stability. His answer was somewhat perplexing to me as a curious student of Taiwanese affairs. “India closely follows developments across the Indo-Pacific region,” he said, adding: “We have an abiding interest in peace and stability in the region, in view of our significant trade, economic, people-to-people, and maritime interests. We urge all concerned
In the past 72 hours, US Senators Roger Wicker, Dan Sullivan and Ruben Gallego took to social media to publicly rebuke the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) over the defense budget. I understand that Taiwan’s head is on the chopping block, and the urgency of its security situation cannot be overstated. However, the comments from Wicker, Sullivan and Gallego suggest they have fallen victim to a sophisticated disinformation campaign orchestrated by an administration in Taipei that treats national security as a partisan weapon. The narrative fed to our allies claims the opposition is slashing the defense budget to kowtow to the Chinese
RSS