The Soldier and the Citizen: The Role of the Military in Taiwan's Development (Taiwan in the Modern World (M.E. Sharpe Hardcover)) [Englisch] [Gebundene Ausgabe]

I have to agree 100% with the above review. It is astonishing that a book like was accepted for publication in the first place. Relying only on government materials and barely at all on Chinese sources, this book cannot be recommended, not even for the lay person with an interest in Taiwan.

This is probably one of the worst books ever written on Taiwan, so bad I can only touch upon a few of its offenses. Using a narrow range of sources largely confined to those representing ruling party viewpoints, Bullard produces a document which indicates almost complete unfamiliarity with the realities of life on Taiwan, the literature on Taiwan or Taiwanese history. One never learns, for example, that the "political socialization" activities of the military among Taiwan's people took place during a period known as the "white terror", in which thousands of Taiwanese were imprisoned, tortured and killed for having unapproved views. For example, Bullard says that military programs in the universities were effective in preventing student demonstrations in the '50s and 60s, but fails to add that students whose politics lacked official approval often disappeared. There are lots of organizational charts and figures on participation, but precious little information on the effectiveness of work, interdepartmental politics, factional struggles, and so forth. There is little objective outside assessment of the information presented; frequently Bullard accepts the military's reviews of its own work, or fails to provide cites at all. For example, Bullard states of the military men used as "instructors" in Taiwan's schools that "Over the years they became accepted and generally welcomed by the students and especially the parents."(p. 148). Anyone even remotely familiar with Taiwan's educational environment knows that those men are generally held in contempt by the populace for activities even the ruling-party owned English paper admitted were often seen as "thought control." They were recently declared unconstitutional by the island's highest court. Bullard's cite for his astounding claim: a military pamphlet. Similarly, Bullard gives a dry recital of the duties of Poltical Warfare officers without ever seriously noting their importance to the regime or t! he fact that American observers worked to stamp them out because they were unethical and increased the problems of Taiwan's already dysfunctional military. Bullard rarely attempts to determine if rules were followed or if policies were actually obeyed in practice. On p. 94 he says "Corporal punishment was forbidden [in the military]." The most cursory check of sources on the issue, however, would have revealed the intense controversy over the island's high death rate among recruits (several hundred annually), the widespread accusations of the routine use of savage punishments and the lawsuits from individual parents, parents organizations and other concerned groups. More important, however, is the lack of political context. Taiwanese independence is barely mentioned; one of the most crucial political dynamics on the island, the struggle between competing Taiwanese and Chinese nationalisms, is lost to the reader. Bullard makes it seem as though the ruling party was struggling with the communists for the hearts and minds of the Taiwanese, but communism was never a major issue on Taiwan, and the real battle was (and is) against Taiwanese nationalism. A much more rich and nuanced view of this is called for. Bullard plans a second volume on anti-subversion activities.