On Sunday, the Whampoa Military Academy, founded by the Republic of China in 1924, celebrated its 100th anniversary. Taiwan and China held centennial celebrations, each laying claim to the institution’s lineage.
Several retired Taiwanese military officials accepted the Chinese Central Military Commission’s invitation to participate in commemorative activities in Guangdong, China, a decision that sparked objections and heated debate in Taiwan. Those officials are walking a fine line; any misstep could see them wading into the dangerous waters of treason by collaborating with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), far beyond mere cognitive warfare and “united front” tactics.
For those who hold the academy in high esteem, invoking the Act Governing Relations Between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (兩岸人民關係條例) and National Security regulations, imposing constraints on these veterans is not only disrespectful, but also dismissive of their service. After all, they say, these veterans are no ordinary people; they attended military academies from childhood, trained to become professional soldiers and rose to the rank of general.
Then again, following pension reforms, they ended up with more favorable pensions than civil servants. It is no exaggeration to say that they live well off of taxpayers’ hard-earned money. The state gives them this preferential treatment for defending the country and their loyalty. Even after returning to civilian life, it is only right that they uphold a high sense of duty and integrity, and identify with the country.
Based on these minimal standards, former premier Hau Pei-tsun (郝柏村) serves as a relevant point of comparison. Born in China, he became a military strongman in Taiwan. He represented a generational shift, and no Whampoa graduate can claim to match his standards, sense of identity and significance.
Although he visited China multiple times and attended events commemorating war, he never once wavered in his beliefs. Hau was a staunch anti-communist, rejecting the legitimacy of the CCP and their self-serving historical narratives.
When visiting the Museum of the War of Chinese People’s Resistance against Japanese Aggression in 2014, he refused the company of Chinese officials. Upon reading the museum’s introduction stating that “the CCP united and guided all ethnic groups across China,” he said that it was Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) who led the eight-year war against the Japanese. On multiple occasions, he corrected biased statements made by the museum guide, demanding they produce the “Declaration of Joint KMT-CCP Cooperation” to set the record straight.
Hau remained loyal to the Republic of China (ROC). Although he advocated peaceful “reunification,” he remained committed to the principle of “constitutional one China,” rooted in Sun Yat-sen’s (孫逸仙) Three Principles of the People (三民主義). Hau categorically rejected surrender, annexation and obliteration.
In 2017, Hau attended a symposium in Nanjing with then-Mainland Affairs Council minister Katharine Chang (張小月) and Veterans Affairs Council Deputy Minister Lee Wen-chung (李文忠).
According to Lee, Hau made three promises in confidence: to never enter CCP state bureaus, to never accept the hospitality of CCP officials and to never engage with media criticizing the ROC. He kept his word until the very end.
Hau visited China during the administration of former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), of the KMT, and a second time during the administration of former president Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), of the Democratic Progressive Party. Despite serving under two different ruling parties, Hau remained steadfast in his views, defending the head of the Whampoa Military Academy as well as his own vision for the ROC.
Whampoa graduates today should emulate Hau. His implementation of three principles — no contact, no negotiation and no compromise — was a clear boundary against treason and collaboration with the CCP.
How can the Whampoa officials who chose to forsake these fundamental principles and become instruments of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army face their friends and fellow soldiers at home? Taiwan should not welcome them back.
Tzou Jiing-wen is editor-in-chief of the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister newspaper).
Translated by Gabrielle Killick
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
As the new year dawns, Taiwan faces a range of external uncertainties that could impact the safety and prosperity of its people and reverberate in its politics. Here are a few key questions that could spill over into Taiwan in the year ahead. WILL THE AI BUBBLE POP? The global AI boom supported Taiwan’s significant economic expansion in 2025. Taiwan’s economy grew over 7 percent and set records for exports, imports, and trade surplus. There is a brewing debate among investors about whether the AI boom will carry forward into 2026. Skeptics warn that AI-led global equity markets are overvalued and overleveraged
RSS