The Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC), introduced by the Ministry of National Defense, recently received much criticism on the letters pages of local newspapers.
Some readers wrote that the ROTC should be abolished, saying that the overall training environment and hours of ROTC officers are inferior to those of regular officers from public military academies, making it difficult for the training corps graduates to adapt to being in the military or to be promoted.
Other readers wrote that by following the example of the Nanya Institute of Technology — which in 2018 founded the country’s only ROTC military academy in Taoyuan — a private military academy should also be established by a college in northern, central, southern and eastern Taiwan.
I am glad that the public is concerned about national defense and that many are willing to discuss the pros and cons of the ROTC. I have also met or worked with many ROTC officers in the military, so I would like to share some thoughts.
First, ROTC officers can contribute to reform and innovation in the military’s organizational culture. Given that such officers study, live and receive military training at a private college, their approaches and perspectives are often different from those of students who live 24 hours a day under centralized management at regular military academies. This certainly affects military leadership and organizational practice.
ROTC officers can help make adjustments to the conservative and stereotypical practices that are projected by the military’s regulations and orders. ROTC cadres and troops are willing to change gradually while breaking rigid command styles and stern management.
The inclusion of ROTC graduates has the potential to reform the military organizational culture and enhance its efficiency. It cannot be done overnight, but is a work in progress.
Next, high-ranking officials must stop perceiving officers from regular military academies as having more legitimacy than ROTC graduates. There is no difference between them in quality or so-called legitimacy. The key lies in their personal characteristics as well as willingness to give their best to the military.
Those who are willing to contribute can “learn by doing, do by learning,” and ability becomes strong as experience is accumulated in command coordination, leadership, management and administrative integration.
This is certainly not something that can only be achieved by officers from regular military academies. Officers from past special programs and the junior college of the ROTC Military Academy, professional officers, specialty officers, reserve officers and even ROTC officers can also do the job and do it well. The military must first reach such a consensus.
It can be seen from the background of students at the National Defense University’s (NDU) War College or Army, Naval and Air Force Command and Staff Colleges, which are responsible for military officers’ advanced education, that all students who meet the requirements for admission are above standard and with great experience.
When I was teaching at NDU, my students included middle and high-ranking cadres from several officer training systems. Even some of Taiwan’s general officers have risen from alternative officer training systems.
Irrespective of a person’s position or origin, as long as they are committed wholeheartedly to the nation, have an aptitude for the military, and are always willing to learn, they are sure to rise to prominence in the military.
Chang Ling-ling is a retired colonel in the armed forces reserves.
Translated by Eddy Chang
A nation has several pillars of national defense, among them are military strength, energy and food security, and national unity. Military strength is very much on the forefront of the debate, while several recent editorials have dealt with energy security. National unity and a sense of shared purpose — especially while a powerful, hostile state is becoming increasingly menacing — are problematic, and would continue to be until the nation’s schizophrenia is properly managed. The controversy over the past few days over former navy lieutenant commander Lu Li-shih’s (呂禮詩) usage of the term “our China” during an interview about his attendance
Bo Guagua (薄瓜瓜), the son of former Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Central Committee Politburo member and former Chongqing Municipal Communist Party secretary Bo Xilai (薄熙來), used his British passport to make a low-key entry into Taiwan on a flight originating in Canada. He is set to marry the granddaughter of former political heavyweight Hsu Wen-cheng (許文政), the founder of Luodong Poh-Ai Hospital in Yilan County’s Luodong Township (羅東). Bo Xilai is a former high-ranking CCP official who was once a challenger to Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) for the chairmanship of the CCP. That makes Bo Guagua a bona fide “third-generation red”
Would China attack Taiwan during the American lame duck period? For months, there have been worries that Beijing would seek to take advantage of an American president slowed by age and a potentially chaotic transition to make a move on Taiwan. In the wake of an American election that ended without drama, that far-fetched scenario will likely prove purely hypothetical. But there is a crisis brewing elsewhere in Asia — one with which US president-elect Donald Trump may have to deal during his first days in office. Tensions between the Philippines and China in the South China Sea have been at
US president-elect Donald Trump earlier this year accused Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) of “stealing” the US chip business. He did so to have a favorable bargaining chip in negotiations with Taiwan. During his first term from 2017 to 2021, Trump demanded that European allies increase their military budgets — especially Germany, where US troops are stationed — and that Japan and South Korea share more of the costs for stationing US troops in their countries. He demanded that rich countries not simply enjoy the “protection” the US has provided since the end of World War II, while being stingy with
RSS