President William Lai (賴清德) on Wednesday last week announced a plan to invest an additional NT$1.25 trillion (US$39.8 billion) in military spending to procure advanced defense systems over the next eight years, and outlined two major plans and concrete steps to defend democratic Taiwan in the face of China’s intensifying threat.
While Lai’s plans for boosting the country’s national security have been praised by many US lawmakers, former defense officials, academics and the American Institute in Taiwan, the US’ de facto embassy in Taiwan, they were not equally welcomed by all Taiwanese, particularly among the opposition parties.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) on the same day said Lai was “playing with fire” by pledging to increase Taiwan’s defense budget, and that his plans are “an investment in war” that would transform Taiwan into an arms factory, as she urged him to refrain from becoming a “troublemaker.”
Cheng’s “playing with fire” rhetoric echoed a phrase Beijing frequently uses to criticize foreign policies it deems to be provocative to China, and most often on Lai, who it has labeled a “separatist” pushing for “Taiwan independence.”
The KMT said that the proposed special defense spending, alongside other special budgets, would exceed the nation’s debt ceiling, leaving a huge debt to future generations, and that it would crowd out spending on social welfare, education and infrastructure.
The Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), which has sided with the KMT on almost all policies and bills since lawmakers took office in February last year and vowed to collaborate in future elections, was a bit softer in its criticism, saying that it would strictly review defense spending.
The KMT and the TPP blasted Lai for what they called “instilling fear” in the civilian population by saying that Beijing has a goal of reaching the military capability to take Taiwan by 2027.
They demanded that Lai explain how he received intelligence about Beijing’s plans for 2027 and expressed their speculations that Lai’s remark was just meant to trigger a “sense of national subjugation” among the public for the ruling Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) political gain, especially in the upcoming elections.
When the Ministry of National Defense published and distributed a printed version of its updated crisis response guidebook titled In Case of Crisis: Taiwan’s National Public Safety Guide early last month, the KMT criticized the government as “wasting taxpayers’ money” and “inciting panic” among the people.
It is disturbing to see how the KMT, the largest opposition party, seems to be deliberately trying to close the public off from understanding geopolitical reality.
Global military expenditure last year increased by 9.4 percent from 2023, the steepest year-on-year rise since the end of the Cold War, data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute showed. Military spending in Europe rose by 17 percent, and several countries in Central and Western Europe saw unprecedented rises as they implemented new spending pledges and large-scale procurement plans, prompted by the war in Ukraine.
In East Asia, in response to China’s three decades of military expenditure growth, which doubled in the past decade, with an average annual growth rate of about 7.5 percent, and intensified gray zone activities, its neighboring countries, including Japan and India, accelerated their military build-up as they feel a threat to their national security.
Moreover, the KMT at times even seems to be trying to “deceive” the public by ignoring and refusing to condemn China’s widespread and systemic violations of human rights, its provocative actions that threaten stability in the Indo-Pacific region, not just against Taiwan, and its help in sustaining Russia’s war in Ukraine.
The KMT fundamentally rejects the idea of communicating evidence-based information of what Taiwan is facing with the public, and refuses to discuss the nation’s practical preparedness (such as critical infrastructure protection, stockpiling emergency supplies and evacuation training) to enhance societal resilience for worst-case scenarios, which are not limited to war, but include earthquakes or climate disasters as well.
There is no doubt that nobody wants a war, nor does anyone want to see a global arms race with trade-offs across various sectors, but “wishful thinking” and “absolute pacifism” could be dangerous. Not building up a nation’s self-defense capabilities and merely calling for “peace” does not guarantee aggressors would leave it alone, especially when facing a country that has repeatedly said it “absolutely will not” rule out using force to bring Taiwan under its control.
In Kaohsiung, you can find an old dojo built by the Japanese overlooking the seaside. There, a master of blade martial arts is the custodian of the sword of the legendary Japanese swordsman Musashi. The Japanese developed Kaohsiung. There was little to show before they arrived. The city does not define itself as a “Japanese” place, but it does not anchor its identity in anything that would oppose Japan, such as revanchism — a barbaric ideology that has only ever generated suffering — or national pride. The residents of Kaohsiung are too pragmatic for that. The city might have become a wonderful
Urban prosperity does not always begin with industrial parks or investment briefings — sometimes, it begins overnight, when the heartbeats of 170,000 people land in a stadium, shaking the ground like an invisible wave of urban renewal. During the two nights that K-pop group Twice performed in Kaohsiung last weekend, the city was not just a city. Instead, it felt like a massive body that had just woken up — the MRT’s blood flow sped up, the night markets’ sense of smell remained active until 4am and the shopping districts swelled as if injected with oxygen. This was not a
The recent confirmation hearing for Austin Dahmer, US President Donald Trump’s nominee for assistant secretary of war for strategy, plans and capabilities, was potentially groundbreaking. Asked how the US could help Taiwan deter or defeat a Chinese attack, Dahmer said: “The US strategy of denial complements Taiwan’s plans for layered defense by providing combat-capable forces on operationally relevant timelines, to provide a strong local defense that is difficult and painful to dislodge while bolstering allied confidence in our resolve.” For the US to provide “combat-capable forces on operationally relevant timelines,” it would be necessary for Washington to implement an assertive forward
I recently watched a panel discussion on Taiwan Talks in which the host rightly asked a critical question: Why is the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC) spearheading a robust global movement to reject China’s ongoing distortion of UN Resolution 2758? While the discussion offered some context, a more penetrating analysis and urgent development was missed. The IPAC action is not merely a political gesture; it is an essential legal and diplomatic countermeasure to China’s escalating and fundamentally baseless campaign to manufacture a claim over Taiwan through the deliberate misinterpretation of a 1971 UN resolution. Since the inauguration of Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) as
RSS