With the furor surrounding the death on July 4 of army corporal Hung Chung-chiu (洪仲丘) threatening to spiral out of control, it was only a matter of time before Minister of National Defense Kao Hua-chu (高華柱) stepped down to take responsibility for Hung’s death and the subsequent cover-up.
Although Hung’s family was right when they said on Monday that Kao’s replacement did not change a thing with regard to the case — as the 66-year-old was not directly responsible for the 24-year-old’s death — drastic action had to be taken and it was, for two main reasons:
For purely political reasons, President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration needed to do something symbolic to show that it is being proactive about the case. When controversies snowball, it is not unusual for heads at the very top to roll.
However, it is evident from the public’s reaction and that of the Hungs that the move was insufficient. The family, and the many others who over the years have been unable to obtain the truth about the mysterious deaths of young servicemen, want the cases to be solved. They want answers.
By appointing Deputy Minister of National Defence Andrew Yang (楊念祖), who was Kao’s deputy on policy issues since September 2009, the administration may have taken a step in the right direction. By elevating him to the top position, the well-respected, academically inclined 58-year-old has become the first civilian to head the ministry under the Ma administration.
Pan-green media immediately criticized the move, saying that Yang not coming from a military background would make him an inefficient defense minister. However, the inclusion of an outsider and the possibility of making a clear break with the past might be just what the military — beset with serious problems over the Hung controversy and the struggling all-volunteer program — needs.
That is not to say that Yang, who spent much of his academic career studying the US-Taiwan-China triangular relationship, will not face internal opposition from the armed forces, which traditionally are resistant to change and external meddling. Reforming the military and addressing the corruption eating away at them from the inside while it attempts to shift from a compulsory to a volunteer-based force will be an extraordinarily complex challenge.
However, to say that Yang cannot achieve this goal simply because he comes from a civilian background is invidious and fails to take history into account, since many defense chiefs before him — including at the world’s largest defense institution, the Pentagon — also came from a non-military backgrounds and have performed their jobs well.
An additional benefit to Yang heading the ministry is the unusually good relations he has with the US military, the defense industry and academia, which certainly will pay dividends when it comes to facilitating exchanges with Taiwan’s principal security guarantor. His ability to interact directly with foreign officials in English and his keener understanding of the need to entertain good relations with Western media — a marked deficiency among leaders of the armed forces — will also be important assets at a time of heightened sensitivity to a possible defensive abandonment by Washington.
Taiwan military observers often argued that despite his position as vice minister, Yang had little influence within the ministry. His elevation to the top job will be an occasion for him to show what he is made of. Given the high stakes and the critical phase the military is currently in, it is essential that Yang be given the support and latitude he needs to prevent the armed forces — Taiwan’s last line of defense against Chinese encroachment — from collapsing.
Yang’s appointment was not purely political; it was the right move at the right time.
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not