Military needs transformation
As your editorial enumerated (March 1, page 8), “Taiwan is different from Ukraine.” Two further contrasts are missing from your list — one external, one internal — that unfortunately work against Taiwan’s favor.
Externally, Ukraine can appeal directly to the international community through the UN. Taiwanese, as a people, have never asserted this right for ourselves, so Taiwan is in a weaker legal position, and fewer questions would be asked in the event of an attack.
More poignant is the internal difference: When Ukrainians take up arms, they have no doubt that it is Ukraine they are defending, but in Taiwan, it is still not clear whether the armed forces are defending Taiwan or the Republic of China (“‘Begonia’ map on military insignia must go: legislator,” Dec. 14, 2021, page 2).
Let us distinguish the narrative underlying each term, instead of conflating the two in the latest fashion (“Pompeo urges US to recognize ROC,” March 5, page 1). Even in peacetime, Taiwanese travelers are faced with the quizzical refrain in airports and hotel lobbies around the world: “You say you’re from Taiwan, but your passport says China.”(Yes, it’s still there, even with the redesigned cover.)
What are the conscripts and reservists asked to fight for in wartime? To defend a diverse, multicultural and vibrant liberal democracy that is as advanced in technology as it is in social welfare? Or to perpetuate the remnants of a regime expelled from the UN, a military that lost a civil war yet sees its adversary as ultimately “the same family,” to be united but for some historical anomaly?
In which case, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s rants about historical unity with Ukraine would fit like a glove (“Notes from Central Taiwan: The odious notion of ‘neutralizing’ Taiwan,” March 7, page 13).
With weapons in hand and lives at stake, there must be no room for doubt in fighters’ minds. Sadly, this is not the case. Despite many rounds of reforms, the military — including the half-dormant conscription and reservist system — is still seen as mostly make-work, an authoritarian institution to humiliate and subjugate Taiwanese — especially young men (“Chiu denies military morale is low,” Oct. 27, 2021, page 1).
Some recent examples: The conscript Hung Chung-chiu (洪仲丘), who died from abuse while serving in the military (“Thousands take to streets for Hung,” Aug. 4, 2013, page 1); the arrogance of Minister of National Defense Chiu Kuo-cheng (邱國正) when then-legislator Chen Po-wei (陳柏惟) questioned him in Hoklo (commonly known as Taiwanese), a national language (Editorial: Language is not just a tool, Oct. 6, 2021, page 8).
Without radical transformation, Taiwan’s armed forces will never have the trust from society and dedication from soldiers that they need.
Te Khai-su
Helsinki
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS