On June 25th, Taiwan’s Public Policy and Taiwan Think Tank, among other organizations, jointly held a symposium to discuss the challenges faced by the national defense forces of Taiwan in the midst of the Taiwan Strait crisis and related reform issues. Experts pointed out that the threat from the Chinese Communist Party to Taiwan is increasing, emphasizing the importance of strengthening Taiwan’s defense and self-defense as a topic of concern for the entire populace.
Host and professor of law at Soochow University, Hu Boyan, emphasized that with Taiwan constantly under threat from across the Strait, national defense is a crucial issue that involves professional technical expertise and directly impacts everyone’s lives, necessitating collective awareness and concern.
Researcher Chen Xi’an from the Taiwan Think Tank highlighted the current volatile international situation, with conflicts ongoing in Ukraine, Iraq, and the frequent psychological warfare and intimidation tactics employed by the CCP against Taiwan. He emphasized that national defense reform is crucial not only to address security threats but also to ensure Taiwan’s sustainable defense capabilities.
Chen Xi’an further expressed that military reform is pivotal in shaping how this generation will face future security challenges. A professional and modernized military not only strengthens self-defense capabilities but also encourages international allies to provide assistance or cooperation. He stressed that for young individuals, national defense is not just about serving in the military or going to battle but about how they perceive their country, navigate risks, and collectively safeguard the chosen way of life.
Associate professor Yu Zongji from the National Taiwan University’s General Education Center highlighted that national defense is a critical issue for the survival of the nation, as failure in defense would adversely affect the entire population. He lamented the fact that many talented individuals serving in the military in Taiwan, after returning from overseas training, often do not have long-term opportunities for service, which is regrettable.
Yu Zongji suggested emulating countries like Israel, which nurture top military talents from high school and continually assess and adjust training programs, and South Korea, which prioritizes selecting top students for military academies. Singapore, on the other hand, emphasizes multidimensional and comprehensive training for military officers to ensure international perspectives and overall capabilities.
Drawing from the United States, which focuses on non-commissioned officer training, Yu Zongji pointed out that these officers tend to remain in the same unit after distribution, making them more familiar with operations compared to officers who rotate every two to three years, a key factor contributing to the US military’s formidable strength.
Analyzing the conscription system, Chang Guocheng, Deputy Director of the General Education Center at Taipei Medical University, underscored that the design of the conscription system should consider the types of warfare national defense may face, taking into account enemy situations, enemy capabilities, weapon performance, and determining the necessary manpower, force ratios, and training and readiness levels for each military branch to allocate resources. The priority should be to strengthen voluntary service units, with the remaining resources utilized for reserve units.
Podcast host Xie Yunxi from the podcast “Micro Rebellion Co-Pilot” emphasized that defense issues are not exclusive to a single gender, yet only 16.9% of military personnel in Taiwan are women, and only 5% of senior female officers hold high-ranking positions. Regarding incidents of harassment, she noted that alleged perpetrators often defend themselves by claiming to have “military expertise,” further complicating the situation for the victims.
Following the discussions, the host and young participants raised questions regarding “enhancing the content of military training,” “the command culture within the military,” and “the rational allocation of resources among the army, navy, and air force,” which were analyzed and answered by the panelists.