The Ministry of National Defense on Tuesday announced that the military would hold its annual Han Kuang exercises from July 22 to 26. Military officers said the exercises would feature unscripted war games, and a decentralized command and control structure. This year’s exercises underline the recent reforms in Taiwan’s military as it transitions from a top-down command structure to one where autonomy is pushed down to the front lines to improve decisionmaking and adaptability.
Militaries around the world have been observing and studying Russia’s war in Ukraine. They have seen that the Ukrainian military has been much quicker to adapt to changing circumstances than the Russian military. Experts say this is largely due to the NATO-style reforms Ukraine implemented after Russia’s invasion in 2014. The reforms transitioned the force away from its Soviet roots of slow and rigid top-down command, which still characterizes the Russian military, to one in which Ukrainian troops have more autonomy to use their initiative to make tactical decisions in the thick of battle.
Military cultures reflect the societies from which they emerge. Autocratic political systems create militaries that are hostile to open communication, autonomy and delegation. Democracies create militaries in which decisionmaking can be decentralized and officers have the freedom to adapt to circumstances.
Taiwan is a democracy, but it has been slow to implement NATO-style military reforms. With its top-heavy command structure and numerous top generals, the military looks closer to the Soviet-style Russian military than a Ukrainian or NATO military.
On one level, this is not entirely surprising. Taiwan’s military traces its founding to the Whampoa Military Academy in China’s Guangdong Province, which was set up by Soviet officers and with Soviet money. Vasily Blyukher, a Soviet commander, was its chief adviser.
Silverado Policy Accelerator founder Dmitri Alperovitch, author of World on the Brink: How America Can Beat China in the Race for the 21st Century, says it is unsurprising that Taiwan’s military is wedded to outdated ideas about force structure and strategy. The US cut Taiwan’s military off when it established diplomatic relations with China. The result is that for nearly four decades the nation’s military has been unable to learn best practices from NATO-standard militaries. It is hardly surprising that it has not adapted, although that is changing.
Adapting the military into a command and control structure able to fight modern wars requires a cultural change, which can be helped by increased democratic oversight and accountability to civilian command. This is why President William Lai (賴清德) appointed Wellington Koo (顧立雄), a civilian, as minister of national defense. Koo has not been socialized in an outdated system wedded to old concepts.
Former president Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) made great strides toward changing society’s relationship with the military and building trust in an institution that has long been associated with the authoritarian period. She went out of her way to visit military bases, dress in camouflage and be photographed holding weapons. She also helped build the military’s trust in and respect for civilian, Democratic Progressive Party leadership.
Lai wants to go further and change the military culture, especially the defeatist mentality among conservative generals that Taiwan cannot resist China.
“In history, there are many cases where the few win out over the many, and there are countless ways to win over old-fashioned enemies with new thinking,” he told air force officers at an air base in Taichung on Tuesday.
It will take time to change the military culture, but the direction being taken is positive.
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
RSS