Taiwan Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

The_Zergling

The_Zergling

Junior Member
kliu0 said:
I want to get back to the conscription issue that is concerning the military now.

Since Taiwan is significantly smaller than that of Developed countries. The end of conscription can also be viewed as demilitarization. This reduction in armed forces will most certainly reduce costs, however it will lead to China having even more of an advantage. The reduced costs of military maintainence can be lead to more money being allocated to the procurement of more modern equipment. But then this raises another issue.....will Taiwan be able to get what it wants with all the money left over?

I'd like to see what other SDF members think about the conscription issue.
Click to expand...

Conscription is quite an interesting issue, and one that several East Asian countries share. It's interesting how your nationality affects your plans and options for life - the Korean and Taiwanese students I've met while at Michigan all have the problem of conscription after graduation, which delays their upcoming job plans unless they had already completed it while in their home countries... whereas if you see a Singaporean kid in your year chances are he's actually roughly 2 years older than you because he already finished the service.

To be honest, I don't feel that Taiwan has much of a concrete military need for conscription, as it's a carryover relic from the Civil War - since Taiwan now has absolutely no intention or capability of "taking back China", the need for such a large standing army has decreased. That's not to say that Taiwan needs an extremely *capable* military, but given that the tour of duty has been cut down from originally three years to a year and three months (as far as I can remember), it seems less and less practical, and more like a rite of passage and way for the country's male population to hold a shared experience, which in of itself does have value.

I'd say the other articles above this post are more relevant as far as Taiwan's military capabilities are concerned - Taiwan's problems of defense appear to be largely limited by supply problems, and lack of territory. Reducing the size of the army will in all likelihood have little effect on defense - however, decreasing the number of training events and live fire exercises is an absolutely horrible idea, and the wrong way to go about cutting costs.
 
The_Zergling

The_Zergling

Junior Member
kliu0 said:
But the point remains, conscription means more able bodied men to fight. An end to conscription means less able bodied men to fight and additionally more military resources have to be deployed to protect more civies.

YES! Finally someone who shares the same views on the ridiculous cutting of crucial live fire exercises and training events. Han Kuang every two years is just plain stupidity, and to say they are saving costs? I thought the end of conscription was already saving them nearly 30% of the annual expenditure. Did you read the article above? Former live fire exercises changed to no live ammunition fired, and also that Taiwan has stockpiles of old ammunition when it uses brand new ones during live fire exercises.
Click to expand...

What I'm saying is that Taiwan's defense is not as heavily reliant on its Army - rather, it's on the Air Force. The Army certainly has a role to play should it come to amphibious invasion, but once it does come to that there is no way Taiwan would be able to fight off China, it would just be a holding action. People argue against the conscription system because they feel it's a waste of their life, if they weren't planning on joining the military in the first place.

It seems like common sense that you can't reduce the amount of training, and achieve the same results. I think one bureaucratic problem here is that many of Taiwan's purchases *look* great, but aren't actually the best choice. The patriot missile batteries and F-16s are a good example - politically, missile defense is good, and F-16s are flashy and all that, but with the ridiculously small stockpile of missiles, they're just paper airplanes in war. In a sense, a military parade without actual effectiveness.

I see the whole cost-cutting measure as a political thing, rather than a military consideration. The blue camp has... let's say leaned towards China, and are getting away with it so far, particularly from the perspective of the international media.
 
A

adeptitus

Captain
VIP Professional
It's not necessary to conscript everyone for 1-3 years. You can go with a mixed full-time volunteer service plus mandatory reserve service.

Able-bodied men over the age of 18, who do not volunteer for paid full-time military service, can be required to serve in the reserves. Depending on the job type, the initial training can be 3-6 months, plus 2 weeks military training/service per year from age 19 to 30'ish. This should produce a pool of ~2 million army reserves that could be called up during times of need.

Those who refuse to carry arms, can serve in the "weaponless" branch, such as "Army Corp of Engineers" to do public works like infrastructure construction.
 
Last edited:
Mr T

Mr T

Senior Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


President Barack Obama's top intelligence official suggested Thursday that China's massive military spending will spur continued U.S. arms sales to Taiwan to maintain a military balance in the potentially dangerous Taiwan Strait.

National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair told lawmakers that China's double-digit annual percentage military spending increases — last year's budget jumped 17.6 percent to about $61 billion — "pose a greater threat to Taiwan."

"Unless Taiwan does something about it, then we're really the only other country helping them do it," Blair said. "That means we're going to have to help them some more in order to maintain a balance."

Much of China's military is focused on rival Taiwan, which relies on U.S. weapons and technology to counter the hundreds of missiles China aims at the self-governing island Beijing claims as its own territory.

U.S. arms sales to Taiwan are a persistent source of U.S.-China tension — Beijing was infuriated by the Bush administration's announcement last year of a $6.5 billion arms package for Taiwan.

The United States is required by its own laws to provide the island with weapons to defend itself and has hinted it would come to Taiwan's aid if mainland forces invaded. But Washington is also wary of angering China, a major trading partner and fellow U.N. Security Council member.

Blair, a retired admiral who heads 16 U.S. intelligence agencies, told a Senate panel that the United States must continue to "make sure that military adventures are unattractive" to both sides. He indicated that the U.S. feels responsible for striking a balance in the Strait.

"Taiwan should not be so defenseless that it feels it has to do everything that China says. On the other hand, China cannot be so overwhelming that it can bully Taiwan," Blair said, answering congressional questions about the U.S. intelligence agencies' latest assessment of threats to the United States.
Click to expand...

Positive indications for Taiwan. We'll see if/when anything comes of it, but at this early stage in the Obama administration one couldn't expect much more.
 
C

ccL1

New Member
Mr T said:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!




Positive indications for Taiwan. We'll see if/when anything comes of it, but at this early stage in the Obama administration one couldn't expect much more.
Click to expand...

LOL, a certain section of that quoted news article is quite funny, actually. Unless I'm interpreting it totally wrong.

He indicated that the U.S. feels responsible for striking a balance in the Strait.

"Taiwan should not be so defenseless that it feels it has to do everything that China says. On the other hand, China cannot be so overwhelming that it can bully Taiwan," Blair said, answering congressional questions about the U.S. intelligence agencies' latest assessment of threats to the United States.
Click to expand...

How is that striking a balance in the Strait? It sounds more like "we have to shore up Taiwan's defenses AND try to limit China's power.

Shouldn't a balance in the Strait entail incentives for both Taiwan and for China?
 
Mr T

Mr T

Senior Member
kliu's right that China is already ahead in many ways. The only way to strike a balance is to help Taiwan whilst restraining China, either through some sort of action or encouraging it to be less beligerant/increase its military budget more gradually.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top