Military needs transformation
As your editorial enumerated (March 1, page 8), “Taiwan is different from Ukraine.” Two further contrasts are missing from your list — one external, one internal — that unfortunately work against Taiwan’s favor.
Externally, Ukraine can appeal directly to the international community through the UN. Taiwanese, as a people, have never asserted this right for ourselves, so Taiwan is in a weaker legal position, and fewer questions would be asked in the event of an attack.
More poignant is the internal difference: When Ukrainians take up arms, they have no doubt that it is Ukraine they are defending, but in Taiwan, it is still not clear whether the armed forces are defending Taiwan or the Republic of China (“‘Begonia’ map on military insignia must go: legislator,” Dec. 14, 2021, page 2).
Let us distinguish the narrative underlying each term, instead of conflating the two in the latest fashion (“Pompeo urges US to recognize ROC,” March 5, page 1). Even in peacetime, Taiwanese travelers are faced with the quizzical refrain in airports and hotel lobbies around the world: “You say you’re from Taiwan, but your passport says China.”(Yes, it’s still there, even with the redesigned cover.)
What are the conscripts and reservists asked to fight for in wartime? To defend a diverse, multicultural and vibrant liberal democracy that is as advanced in technology as it is in social welfare? Or to perpetuate the remnants of a regime expelled from the UN, a military that lost a civil war yet sees its adversary as ultimately “the same family,” to be united but for some historical anomaly?
In which case, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s rants about historical unity with Ukraine would fit like a glove (“Notes from Central Taiwan: The odious notion of ‘neutralizing’ Taiwan,” March 7, page 13).
With weapons in hand and lives at stake, there must be no room for doubt in fighters’ minds. Sadly, this is not the case. Despite many rounds of reforms, the military — including the half-dormant conscription and reservist system — is still seen as mostly make-work, an authoritarian institution to humiliate and subjugate Taiwanese — especially young men (“Chiu denies military morale is low,” Oct. 27, 2021, page 1).
Some recent examples: The conscript Hung Chung-chiu (洪仲丘), who died from abuse while serving in the military (“Thousands take to streets for Hung,” Aug. 4, 2013, page 1); the arrogance of Minister of National Defense Chiu Kuo-cheng (邱國正) when then-legislator Chen Po-wei (陳柏惟) questioned him in Hoklo (commonly known as Taiwanese), a national language (Editorial: Language is not just a tool, Oct. 6, 2021, page 8).
Without radical transformation, Taiwan’s armed forces will never have the trust from society and dedication from soldiers that they need.
Te Khai-su
Helsinki
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath