The Taliban swept to victory in Afghanistan faster than anyone had expected. There were several reasons: massive corruption, struggles among government factions, warlords dividing the country and a lack of a long-term vision for the nation.
Afghan government forces, which consisted of more than 300,000 soldiers and were equipped with US-made Black Hawk helicopters and other advanced equipment, were ingloriously defeated by a mere 60,000 Taliban fighters.
However, a closer look at background factors reveals one thing that Taiwan should learn from: a voluntary military service.
In the final days of providing financial aid to Afghanistan, Western democracies realized that more than 60 percent of the funds were spent on administrative and personnel expenses. Simply put, Afghanistan had a volunteer military system, and despite continuous civil war, the country still relied on the US to pay the salaries of its military personnel.
As it is difficult to make a living in Afghanistan, where the situation is chaotic and territory is controlled by warlords. Many people joined the army simply to make a living. They came from various tribes and provinces in Afghanistan, and their allegiance was to the salary, not the country. Once the situation changed and it was possible that the government would be unable to pay their salaries, they abandoned their jobs, dispersing in no time.
In Taiwan, the public has never stopped questioning the voluntary military service after its implementation in 2018, when it replaced the conscription system that had been in place since 1945.
The American Institute in Taiwan, the US Department of State and several think tanks have repeatedly questioned Taiwan’s voluntary military service system, and even said that Taiwan lacks the determination to defend itself and has insufficient crisis awareness.
The Control Yuan said bluntly in a report that it has not been proven that Taiwan’s combat readiness under the voluntary system is better than under the conscription system.
In other words, the government’s promotion of voluntary military service is not as effective as expected, and this poses a major national security risk.
Moreover, according to the Ministry of National Defense annual budget, the military’s personnel maintenance costs exceeds NT$140 billion (US$5.03 billion), which is close to 50 percent of the total national defense budget — in Afghanistan, it was 60 percent on average.
The Legislative Yuan Budget Center said in a report that through various bonuses and benefits, it is “easy to increase, but difficult to reduce” personnel expenses in the armed forces. This will inevitably reduce the budget funds available for the improvement of equipment and training, as well as high-tech battle readiness and exercises.
Lithuania and Sweden reactivated conscription in 2015 and 2017 respectively.
The rapid defeat of the Afghan army is also thought-provoking.
The Control Yuan’s report highlighted five major shortcomings of voluntary military service: difficulty recruiting soldiers, the overly high costs of maintaining troops, a decline in mobilization and battle capabilities, insufficient quality of soldiers, and difficulty establishing the idea that national defense is everyone’s responsibility. These are problems that the government must address.
Even Switzerland, a country that has maintained neutrality and is not the target of any foreign aggression, has adhered to conscription to cultivate a sense of responsibility among its citizens to fight their own battles.
Faced with the threat of China’s powerful military, can Taiwan really afford to insist on voluntary military service?
Chang Feng-lin is a university administrator based in Taichung.
Translated by Lin Lee-kai
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS