On June 19, President William Lai (賴清德) announced the establishment of the Whole-of-Society Defense Resilience Committee (全社會防衛韌性委員會) at the Presidential Office.
This initiative originates from Lai’s policy of integrating civil and national defense to strengthen Taiwan’s social resilience to natural disasters and growing military threats from China. Although some have criticized the committee as unnecessary symbolism, it can play a proactive role in Taiwan’s civil-military relations.
National and civil defenses are crucial to enhance deterrence against a Chinese invasion. However, a divergence remains between the military and civil society.
The authoritarian era made the military an isolated community detached from Taiwanese society. During the White Terror era, the military was an essential tool for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) to defend its autocratic regime. During 38 years of martial law, more than 20,000 people were imprisoned and 5,000 executed, resulting in widespread distrust toward the government and the military.
Democratization ultimately led to the nationalization of the military and imposed restrictions on its law enforcement and judicial powers. However, the military did not become more open as a result.
Bureaucrats in the Ministry of National Defense still frequently cite “lack of professionalism” or “national security concerns” to refuse engagement with civil society.
In the case of army corporal Hung Chung-chiu’s (洪仲丘) death in 2013, the ministry’s passive attitude and evasive response to concerns over military abuse sparked significant pushback from society. Taiwanese men’s experience of compulsory military service — characterized by poor, outdated training and being a waste of time — also contributes to public distrust of the ministry.
Despite military service being one of the least popular career options, many Taiwanese cherish their democracy and freedom, and see civil defense as an alternative way to contribute to defense, such as by participating in training and workshops held by civil defense non-governmental organizations (NGOs) like the Kuma Academy.
However, the lack of interaction between the ministry and civil defense NGOs leads to distrust, which hinders cooperation.
Former minister of national defense Chiu Kuo-cheng (邱國正) once described the Kuma Academy as a guerrilla group training with paintballs. However, the Kuma Academy has never provided shooting training.
The National Pension Reform Committee, established in 2016, provides a model for promoting social consensus. The new defense resilience committee should learn from the experience by inviting representatives from the government, military and civil society.
The Whole-of-Society Defense Resilience Committee can become a platform of diverse perspectives and provide a comprehensive proposal for security strategy rather than a tool for expanding presidential power, as a pro-China former KMT legislator wrongly claimed.
By bringing fresh knowledge and ideas into defense policy-making, Taiwan can accelerate its transition to asymmetric defense and strengthen deterrence against China’s aggression.
Integrating civil and national defense would also enhance Taiwan’s resilience and allow every Taiwanese to play a role in securing peace in the Taiwan Strait.
Calvin Chu is a research associate at the Taiwan Democratic Progressive Party Mission in the US. He worked for the civil defense non-governmental organization Forward Alliance. The opinions expressed here are solely his own and do not express the views or opinions of his employer.
Having lived through former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s tumultuous and scandal-ridden administration, the last place I had expected to come face-to-face with “Mr Brexit” was in a hotel ballroom in Taipei. Should I have been so surprised? Over the past few years, Taiwan has unfortunately become the destination of choice for washed-up Western politicians to turn up long after their political careers have ended, making grandiose speeches in exchange for extraordinarily large paychecks far exceeding the annual salary of all but the wealthiest of Taiwan’s business tycoons. Taiwan’s pursuit of bygone politicians with little to no influence in their home
In 2025, it is easy to believe that Taiwan has always played a central role in various assessments of global national interests. But that is a mistaken belief. Taiwan’s position in the world and the international support it presently enjoys are relatively new and remain highly vulnerable to challenges from China. In the early 2000s, the George W. Bush Administration had plans to elevate bilateral relations and to boost Taiwan’s defense. It designated Taiwan as a non-NATO ally, and in 2001 made available to Taiwan a significant package of arms to enhance the island’s defenses including the submarines it long sought.
US lobbyist Christian Whiton has published an update to his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” discussed on the editorial page on Sunday. His new article, titled “What Taiwan Should Do” refers to the three articles published in the Taipei Times, saying that none had offered a solution to the problems he identified. That is fair. The articles pushed back on points Whiton made that were felt partisan, misdirected or uninformed; in this response, he offers solutions of his own. While many are on point and he would find no disagreement here, the nuances of the political and historical complexities in
Taiwan faces an image challenge even among its allies, as it must constantly counter falsehoods and misrepresentations spread by its more powerful neighbor, the People’s Republic of China (PRC). While Taiwan refrains from disparaging its troublesome neighbor to other countries, the PRC is working not only to forge a narrative about itself, its intentions and value to the international community, but is also spreading lies about Taiwan. Governments, parliamentary groups and civil societies worldwide are caught in this narrative tug-of-war, each responding in their own way. National governments have the power to push back against what they know to be
RSS