On Friday, the Ministry of National Defense (MND) briefed an invited group of media representatives on its arms purchase proposals. This was obviously a MND attempt to seek popular support for the purchases against the backdrop of a continued deadlock between the Legislative Yuan and the Executive Yuan over the special arms purchase budget.
The MND is obviously in a hurry to have the deal sealed. As conceded by the Defense Minister Lee Jye (
Threats posed by China are another reason for the big hurry. Not only have China's annual military budgets grown by multiples, but the real figures are believed to be much higher -- estimates have put them at two to three times higher -- than the officially announced budgets.
While the concerns that the Legislative Yuan, or really the pan-blue opposition, have about the arms purchases are not entirely groundless, they pale in comparison with the nation's security needs.
One concern cited has been the likelihood of corruption and kickback commissions. Of course this skepticism comes from the nation's experience in connection with the purchase of Lafayette submarines from France in the 1990s.
However, this does not mean that Taiwan should stop purchasing arms altogether just to avoid a repeat of that kind of corruption. Instead, open and transparent information on pricing and negotiations can help reduce the likelihood of corruption.
As for the pan-blue lawmakers' request that the submarines proposed for purchase be manufactured here, the MND suggests there are feasibility issues. According to Li, lacking design, quality control and testing capabilities, after the state-owned China Shipbuilding (中船) completes construction of the submarines, it will face the same situation as Aerospace Industrial Development Corp (漢翔) did. After this company finished building fighter jets for the government, its manufacturing lines were shut down because no further orders were forthcoming. Moreover, many foreign governments have been unwilling to issue export permits required for some highly sensitive and sophisticated parts and components. Unless this problem is solved, China Shipbuilding's ability to build the submarines in question remains problematic.
Finally, there is the difficult issue of price. The pan-blue camp had asked that the total price of the arms purchase -- NT$610 billion -- be reduced by NT$200 billion in the event that China Shipbuilding cannot assemble the submarines. On the other hand, the pan-green camp is saying that the deal would be acceptable so long as the price is cut by NT$100 billion.
While efforts to cut prices should be appreciated, two things must be kept in mind -- they must be done for the right reasons (not merely to vex the government) and they must conform to the realistic situation of the market.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS