The first batch of 38 new M1A2T Abrams tanks purchased from the US arrived in Taipei on Sunday. As with many of Taiwan’s previous military and arms purchases, the shipment of tanks was immediately criticized by biased “military experts,” who made sarcastic remarks about the tanks being “too large” or “unsuited to Taiwan’s terrain.”
The rationale behind the purchase lay in more than just the tanks’ tactical use; what is more important is the strategic value they demonstrate.
To establish deterrent power, Taiwan’s military resources have been for the most part concentrated on its navy and air force, including air defense and anti-ship missiles. In contrast, the army’s equipment — whether it be main battle tanks or gear for soldiers — has been largely secondary.
From an outside perspective, Taiwan’s homeland defense capabilities seem to primarily focus on the maritime and airspace regions around the nation. If the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) were to successfully land in Taiwan, Taiwan’s army — with its limited resources — would struggle to resist, let alone defeat the invaders.
Furthermore, a lack of opportunities to use first-rate equipment might lead to an accumulated sense of deprivation that could affect the morale of Taiwan’s ground forces and military recruitment rates. That would make the implementation of a nationwide defense mobilization plan even more difficult. After all, when it comes to nationwide defense mobilization, even if the army is not the most important factor, it still plays a vital role.
The unique strategic value of the M1A2T purchase lies in two major points:
First, the tanks demonstrate Taiwan’s defensive determination.
Second, they would help prevent an excessive tilt in Taiwan’s military development, thus ensuring smoother coordination among the three military branches and ultimately aiding the implementation of nationwide defense mobilization.
Huang Wei-ping works in public service and has a master’s degree from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University in Massachusetts.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls. That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed
RSS