Taiwan must improve its war preparations, and strengthen its ability to survive the first 70 days of a war without aid from other countries, a defense researcher said last week.
The nation needs to bolster its inventory of stocks that it would need during war, as it would likely face a blockade and be unable to receive supplies, Institute of National Defense and Security Research fellow Su Tzu-yun (蘇紫雲) said.
Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Wang Ting-yu (王定宇) agreed, saying that Taiwan must acquire all the supplies and equipment it needs before a war. He added that the nation must acquire more precision weapons, and learn to use its existing weapons systems more effectively.
The government is working toward these, as evidenced by Taiwan Power Co’s plans to increase its coal stock to 50 days, the military’s plans to boost missile defenses along the east coast, and the Ministry of National Defense’s plans to procure 3,000 domestically produced drones, as well as 100AIM-X Block II Sidewinder tactical missiles from the US.
These moves, along with extending conscription terms, are a step in the right direction, but some of the long-term plans should be sped up, as experts have predicted that China might attempt to invade Taiwan as soon as 2027. Developments in Taiwan must keep pace with those in China to serve as a real deterrent. Taiwan must communicate this urgency to Washington to accelerate training efforts and arms deliveries.
There are also civil defense issues that need to be addressed.
“The more we look into our civil defense preparedness, the less we feel confident of the readiness of Taiwanese,” Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Lin Ching-yi (林靜儀) said last month.
Chang Li-ming (張離明), who heads the Taiwan National Security Institute’s civil defense project, said that the civil defense system was being held back by more than a lack of training, and Taiwan Statebuilding Party Taipei chapter head Wu Hsin-tai (吳欣岱) said that only a small amount of the funding allocated by local governments for civil defense is devoted to training, with most going to social activities.
It is also unclear whether Taiwanese would have the will or the training to fight in the event of a Chinese invasion. A key reason that Ukraine has been so successful in resisting the Russian invasion is that ordinary Ukrainians are willing to fight.
Achieving similar results in Taiwan will require greater efforts to foster a national consciousness, and improve awareness of the enemy. This is being hampered by China’s disinformation campaign, and by meetings between lawmakers from Taiwan’s main opposition party and Chinese officials.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators had accused the Democratic Progressive Party government of trying to “desinicize” the national curriculum. Teaching Mandarin, classical Chinese literature or Chinese history should not be a problem, but educators should draw a clear distinction from the politics of the People’s Republic of China and emphasize that the Chinese Communist Party does not represent Taiwan or Taiwanese,
While meeting with a delegation from Stanford University’s Hoover Institution at the Presidential Office in August last year, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) said that Taiwan had the resolve to defend its sovereignty.
That resolve is the crux of the matter, because without the will to fight, even the most advanced weapons will be of no use, and if Taiwanese are not willing to defend themselves, other countries are not likely to provide assistance.
The government must clearly communicate to the public that China cannot be reasoned with on the issue of Taiwanese sovereignty, and if Taiwanese do not wish to be annexed by China, they must be willing and prepared to fight.
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase
RSS