KMT's Military Budget Stance Criticized as 'Ah Q Victory'

Taipei, Taiwan – A sharp debate has erupted over Taiwan's NT$780 billion military procurement bill, with prominent figures clashing over the necessity and strategic implications of the spending. Legislator Ma Wen-chun, a convener of the legislative committee on foreign and national defense, stated that if she had complete authority, she would advocate for a zero-cost approach, implying that many items in the special budget lack the urgency required for such a measure.

“

If I could have the final say, I would support zero cost, because in my view, the procurement items listed in the special statute do not meet the urgency required for a special statute.

This statement drew a strong rebuke from Chang Ya-chung, president of the Sun Yat-sen School, who characterized the Kuomintang's (KMT) celebration of the bill's passage as a form of 'Emperor's New Clothes' victory, or an 'Ah Q spiritual victory.' Chang accused the KMT leadership of promoting a win that deceives their own voters, questioning whether the party elite genuinely believes they have achieved a success.

“

Ma Wen-chun's public statement is more like a public 'confession.' It's sympathetic and makes one's nose twitch. Chang Ya-chung said that Ma Wen-chun is at least willing to speak her mind and admit the absurdity behind this 'political vote.'

Chang further elaborated that Ma Wen-chun's public remarks were akin to a 'confession,' revealing her internal conflict and the absurdity behind the political vote. He argued that Ma, due to her long tenure on the defense committee, understands the intricacies of military procurement, strategic needs, and systemic issues, making her words particularly weighty. Chang contended that the core issue lies in the lack of urgency for many of the items listed in the special budget, suggesting that if these acquisitions were truly necessary, they should undergo normal review and debate within the annual budget system rather than being fast-tracked via a special ordinance.

“

What should truly be questioned is the KMT central leadership. Why must someone who serves as the convener of the Defense Committee and truly understands defense issues ultimately speak of their helplessness in a near-'penitent' manner? Doesn't this illustrate how little effort, how hollow, how foolish, and how irresponsible the KMT has been regarding national strategy for the past twenty years?

More broadly, Chang criticized both the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and the KMT for their perceived failures in national strategy. He asserted that Taiwan has never truly established its own 'peace strategy,' viewing military procurement as a superficial technical issue that should serve a larger national strategy, not replace it. Chang lamented that the KMT, over the past two decades, has failed to develop a distinct strategic discourse or offer a viable national security plan different from the DPP's. He accused the KMT of lacking the courage to discuss the possibility of peace and of being hesitant to initiate cross-strait political dialogue, remaining confined to a framework of 'economics only, no politics.' This, he argued, leaves the KMT perpetually reacting to the DPP's agenda within a framework set by others, with the NT$780 billion budget serving as an 'expensive epitaph' for the party's emptiness and confusion.

“

A political party without a strategic soul and the right to discourse on security and peace can only be forced to make choices on battlefields set by others. And 78 billion is the most expensive epitaph for this emptiness and confusion.