Two weeks ago, several retired generals got together in a touching show of support for President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) ahead of January’s presidential election. On the morning of Sept. 2, Ma attended an event to mark Armed Forces Day and National Defense Day, and to celebrate the centennial of the founding of the Republic of China (ROC). He was joined by dozens of retired generals.
The next morning, the president of the Central Military Institute Alumni Association’s (CMIAA) general committee and former army commander-in-chief General Chen Chen-hsiang (陳鎮湘) held another event at the Armed Forces Officers’ Club on behalf of the heads of Taiwan’s five biggest veterans organizations.
The purpose of the second event was to drum up support for Ma’s re-election bid, and it was attended by about 25 retired generals and more than 600 people representing the military associations.
Ma was there to address the throng, and to personally hand out campaign flags to the heads of the veterans associations of various counties and cities around Taiwan. Forty-seven associations and organizations were involved, including the Veterans Association of the ROC. In addition, support groups are to be set up as branch associations in 17 cities and counties around the country to rally behind Ma’s campaign.
After watching events over the past week, it has become obvious that many media -commentators have neglected a couple of key points.
First, the Armed Forces Day event was organized by the Ministry of National Defense. How is the ministry directly associated with these retired generals?
It is difficult not to be suspicious of their use of this event to express their opinions in this way, especially in this politically sensitive period in the run-up to the presidential election.
Second, it is unusual for the head of the CMIAA to be able to mobilize all of these veterans organizations on such a huge scale. Who paid for it all?
It would be fine if it were financed by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) funds, donations by private businesses and industry, or the retired generals themselves.
However, if any financial support or subsidy was forthcoming from the government, this would be a different matter entirely. It would be going against the principles of administrative neutrality and non-intervention by the military in elections.
Perhaps the KMT is enlisting the retired generals to lend their weight to mobilizing military subordinates. This kind of tactic has served the KMT well in past elections. However, this doesn’t appear to be the most effective way to run campaigns. During their time in the service, military personnel may well feel obliged to toe the line for the sake of their careers, but once they are discharged, they can do as they please. Most military personnel have their own ideas and perspectives.
Asking retired generals to show their support for Ma shows little more than their individual voting intentions as members of the KMT. They cannot speak for anyone else. If the Vocational Assistance Commission for Retired Servicemen were to publicize the respective proportion of retired generals to decommissioned officers or servicemen, we would know for sure who was being taken more seriously.
What have the local KMT branches done for discharged officers and soldiers? It is not enough to simply play the retired-generals card every time an election is on the horizon. As far as future presidential candidates are concerned, retired military personnel, officers and enlisted men alike will care more about whether a given candidate had implemented the political promises they had made concerning matters of national defense, the progress of current national defense policy reform and the plans they have for the future.
Ma would have nothing to worry about if he had a good track record on national defense reform and had done something about the problems faced by the military in Taiwan.
A certain political commentator, himself ex-military, expressed doubts over how effective these events were, saying that despite the large number of retired generals who support Ma, what would really be effective would be to showcase widespread support by mid-level officers.
If the KMT had any sense at all, it would refrain from inviting retired generals to these exclusive events. If the KMT is after drumming up support, it would be better off inviting retired officers to events organized by the party at the county or city level, or even holding one big national shindig for all decommissioned servicemen and women. This would also remove the personal element.
If Ma fails in his re-election bid, it will not be the fault of the loyal generals.
On the other hand, if he does get his second term, then they will be shown to be loyal servants to their lord. Frankly, all of this talk about supporting Ma is just spin.
Who knows how many of the ordinary decommissioned servicemen and women will actually support Ma at the ballot box? Deep down, the rosy glow this spin tries to portray is an attempt to gloss over a deep-seated concern, as the party is anxious not to see these decommissioned men and women turn instead to potential presidential candidate People First Party Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜). If they do, it might scupper Ma’s chances.
Wang Jyh-perng is an associate research fellow at the Association for Managing Defense and Strategies.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS