Over the past month, multiple public figures in the US have raised calls to arm Taiwanese as a deterrent against China. The idea has not gained realistic traction within Taiwan, although it has garnered some media attention.
The first of these comments came from former US national security adviser Robert O’Brien. Speaking in Taiwan on March 24, he said that having 1 million Taiwanese on “every corner and in every apartment block” armed with AK-47 assault rifles would deter the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) from attempting an invasion.
“Think how rattled it would make the leadership of the CCP if they knew that if they invaded, there would be 1 million Taiwanese with an AK-47,” he said. “Those legitimate concerns around gun ownership concerns or gun safety pale in comparison when we look at the war crimes that have taken place.”
A couple of weeks later on April 14, Republican presidential candidate and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy made a similar call to raucous cheers at the annual gathering of the US’ National Rifle Association (NRA) in Indianapolis, Indiana.
“You want China not to invade Taiwan? Here is something we can do: The NRA can open its branch next time in Taiwan,” Ramaswamy said. “And you want to stop [Chinese President] Xi Jinping (習近平) from invading Taiwan, put a gun in every Taiwanese household, have them defend themselves. Let’s see what Xi Jinping does then.”
Although O’Brien was more metered in his rhetoric than Ramaswamy — acknowledging a Taiwanese aversion to guns and suggesting public armories or personal safes to store them — both are operating from a culturally specific perspective that says far more about US politics than it does about Taiwan’s defense.
There is a difference between “deterrence through strength,” as many US politicians advocate, and flooding the streets with firearms. As a grouping of islands, Taiwan is more concerned about air and sea attacks than street skirmishes. A full landing by Chinese troops would be exceedingly difficult, and it would come later in a conflict, if at all. Until then, the average citizen could hardly be expected to shoot a missile out of the air with their personal AR-15, nor would Xi feel threatened by them.
What widespread gun ownership would do is make daily life in Taiwan far less safe. The damage wrought by gun violence in the US hardly needs reminding, but bears repeating. Americans own considerably more guns than anyone else in the world, even outnumbering the population, with 120.5 firearms for every 100 people. The US has 18 times more violent gun deaths than other developed countries. With data as clear as this, no wonder other countries have little appetite for guns, Taiwan included.
Although poorly considered, there is a kernel of truth to O’Brien’s and Ramaswamy’s advice. Most Taiwanese men who went through compulsory military service would say they are still not confident in their ability to use a firearm in a combat situation. Luckily, making training more practical is part of ongoing military reforms, with firing exercises now including shooting from different positions and in diverse situations. Most Taiwanese would also agree that better training and communication on what citizens should do in a conflict is sorely needed. While there are certainly more discussions to be had, they require more nuance and situational understanding than just “give them guns.”
Just last week, videos were widely shared online of a 17-year-old shooting up a closed pawn shop beside a bustling street in New Taipei City’s Tucheng District (土城) with a modified submachine gun. The incongruity of the incident was shocking for a country relatively safe from gun violence. If this is the kind of scene that would become more common in an armed society, it is hard to imagine anyone championing the cause.
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
Last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding more than half of the legislative seats, cut about NT$94 billion (US$2.85 billion) from the yearly budget. The cuts include 60 percent of the government’s advertising budget, 10 percent of administrative expenses, 3 percent of the military budget, and 60 percent of the international travel, overseas education and training allowances. In addition, the two parties have proposed freezing the budgets of many ministries and departments, including NT$1.8 billion from the Ministry of National Defense’s Indigenous Defense Submarine program — 90 percent of the program’s proposed
RSS