The latest legislative session, which was already extended for a month following a vote by the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on Dec. 19 last year, finally closed on Friday. Despite the extension, the Executive Yuan’s NT$1.25 trillion (US$39.7 billion) eight-year special defense budget was again blocked by the opposition on Tuesday, and instead the legislature sent the TPP’s own defense bill proposal to the committee for review on the final day. The next session would commence on Feb. 24, after the Lunar New Year break.
With the KMT’s prevarications and the TPP’s alternative proposal, the crucial defense budget review remains in limbo. The hope would be that the TPP’s version is at least workable. Unfortunately, it is not.
Presenting a considerable reduction in the budget as a money-saving virtue, the TPP’s proposal, according to the Ministry of National Defense’s Department of Strategic Planning Director Lieutenant General Huang Wen-chi (黃文啓), hollows out the operational measures of the government’s defense budget and turns the entire endeavor into an exercise in cherry-picking a list of five weapons, without consideration of storage facilities, ammunition depots, shelters, maintenance facilities or training. Huang said that if the TPP version, which he termed “rushed and unprofessional,” was forced through, “it would be impossible for the ministry to implement it.”
The TPP’s version caps the budget at NT$400 billion across eight years, with a requirement of an annual budget and review during that time, making planning and procurement guarantees effectively impossible.
On Jan. 14, well into the extended legislative session in which the defense budget should have been reviewed, TPP Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) returned from a whirlwind visit to Washington in which he met with officials from the White House US National Security Council, US State Department and defense agencies. He then announced that the party had plans for proposing its own special defense budget. It is astonishing that Huang could, in the space of two weeks, develop an integrated plan for the development of Taiwan’s national defense strategy that would be better conceived than the one prepared by the Ministry of National Defense consultations with US defense experts.
Perhaps the requirement of an annual budget and review should be termed the “we’re making this up as we go along” clause.
The TPP version also removed any provisions for the development of President William Lai’s (賴清德) proposed T-Dome sensor-to-shooter nationwide missile defense system.
There is some debate on the advisability of the T-Dome concept. In the article “‘T-Dome’ a potential miscalculation” (page 8, Jan. 14), Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St. Andrew’s University in Osaka, questioned whether the proposed system was more about political posturing than sound military strategy, and cautioned against misleading comparisons with Israel’s “Iron Dome” or the US’ proposed “Golden Dome” concepts, saying that these were both designed to address threat scenarios different from that faced by Taiwan. Matsumura also noted the strategic opportunity cost of allocating resources to the system that might be better employed elsewhere.
His reservations about the T-Dome concept could be interpreted as backing the TPP’s removal of it from the budget, but Matsumura also noted another factor influencing Taiwan’s ability to defend itself, and the crucial perception of this overseas, was political unity. The current shenanigans being played out in the Legislative Yuan do little to assuage these concerns.
On Tuesday, Lai called on the opposition parties to allow the government’s defense budget to be submitted for review, saying that if they had reservations about certain parts, they could remove them or propose amendments, but that a review must go ahead nonetheless. That did not happen.
The stalling and introduction of the opposition parties’ own versions is preventing the government from getting on with the task of strengthening Taiwan’s national defenses; after 10 rounds of obstruction by the opposition, even when the ruling party proposed its own version, the KMT and TPP have overridden professional expertise, risking having a military development plan that is fragmented and rendered unworkable.
At the same time, the government has a responsibility to communicate to the public why it has proposed such an expensive package, and why it is preferable to the TPP’s ill-thought-out and ostensibly “cost-saving” NT$400 billion alternative.
The cancelation this week of President William Lai’s (賴清德) state visit to Eswatini, after the Seychelles, Madagascar and Mauritius revoked overflight permits under Chinese pressure, is one more measure of Taiwan’s shrinking executive diplomatic space. Another channel that deserves attention keeps growing while the first contracts. For several years now, Taipei has been one of Europe’s busiest legislative destinations. Where presidents and foreign ministers cannot land, parliamentarians do — and they do it in rising numbers. The Italian parliament opened the year with its largest bipartisan delegation to Taiwan to date: six Italian deputies and one senator, drawn from six
Recently, Taipei’s streets have been plagued by the bizarre sight of rats running rampant and the city government’s countermeasures have devolved into an anti-intellectual farce. The Taipei Parks and Street Lights Office has attempted to eradicate rats by filling their burrows with polyurethane foam, seeming to believe that rats could not simply dig another path out. Meanwhile, as the nation’s capital slowly deteriorates into a rat hive, the Taipei Department of Environmental Protection has proudly pointed to the increase in the number of poisoned rats reported in February and March as a sign of success. When confronted with public concerns over young
Taiwan and India are important partners, yet this reality is increasingly being overshadowed in current debates. At a time when Taiwan-India relations are at a crossroads, with clear potential for deeper engagement and cooperation, the labor agreement signed in February 2024 has become a source of friction. The proposal to bring in 1,000 migrant workers from India is already facing significant resistance, with a petition calling for its “indefinite suspension” garnering more than 40,000 signatures. What should have been a straightforward and practical step forward has instead become controversial. The agreement had the potential to serve as a milestone in
China has long given assurances that it would not interfere in free access to the global commons. As one Ministry of Defense spokesperson put it in 2024, “the Chinese side always respects the freedom of navigation and overflight entitled to countries under international law.” Although these reassurances have always been disingenuous, China’s recent actions display a blatant disregard for these principles. Countries that care about civilian air safety should take note. In April, President Lai Ching-te (賴清德) canceled a planned trip to Eswatini for the 40th anniversary of King Mswati III’s coronation and the 58th anniversary of bilateral diplomatic
RSS