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 badly misread Japan. It sought to intimidate Tokyo into silence on Taiwan. Instead, it has achieved the opposite by hardening Japanese resolve. By trying to bludgeon a major power like Japan into accepting its “red lines” — above all on Taiwan — China laid bare the raw coercive logic of compellence now driving its foreign policy toward Asian states. From the Taiwan Strait and the East and South China Seas to the Himalayan frontier, Beijing has increasingly relied on economic warfare, diplomatic intimidation and military pressure to bend neighbors to its will. Confident in its growing power, China appeared to believe
After more than three weeks since the Honduran elections took place, its National Electoral Council finally certified the new president of Honduras. During the campaign, the two leading contenders, Nasry Asfura and Salvador Nasralla, who according to the council were separated by 27,026 votes in the final tally, promised to restore diplomatic ties with Taiwan if elected. Nasralla refused to accept the result and said that he would challenge all the irregularities in court. However, with formal recognition from the US and rapid acknowledgment from key regional governments, including Argentina and Panama, a reversal of the results appears institutionally and politically
In 2009, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) made a welcome move to offer in-house contracts to all outsourced employees. It was a step forward for labor relations and the enterprise facing long-standing issues around outsourcing. TSMC founder Morris Chang (張忠謀) once said: “Anything that goes against basic values and principles must be reformed regardless of the cost — on this, there can be no compromise.” The quote is a testament to a core belief of the company’s culture: Injustices must be faced head-on and set right. If TSMC can be clear on its convictions, then should the Ministry of Education
The Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) provided several reasons for military drills it conducted in five zones around Taiwan on Monday and yesterday. The first was as a warning to “Taiwanese independence forces” to cease and desist. This is a consistent line from the Chinese authorities. The second was that the drills were aimed at “deterrence” of outside military intervention. Monday’s announcement of the drills was the first time that Beijing has publicly used the second reason for conducting such drills. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leadership is clearly rattled by “external forces” apparently consolidating around an intention to intervene. The targets of
RSS