2020/08/29
In response to media reports that “the purchase of shore-mounted harpoon anti-ship missiles from the United States by Taiwan increased to NT$80 billion”, the Naval Command stated today (29) that the report did not match the facts, which are explained
Navy Command Headquarters (MND) Press Release
August 29, 2020 19:23 (GMT +8)
In response to the media reports that "the purchase of shore-mounted harpoon anti-ship missiles from the United States by Taiwan increased to NT$80 billion", the Naval Command stated today (29) that the report does not match the facts, which are explained as follows:
1. In coping with increasing enemy threats, the defense model is conducted based on the military strategy of "defense with firm entrenchment, multiple tier of heavy deterrence" as well as the overall defense concept of "protection with combat readiness, decisive victory at the coast, and beachside annihilation", which runs through the simulation of actual combat scenarios and model recreation analysis as the basis for decision-making for army build-up.
2. Shore-mounted harpoon anti-ship missiles are capable of maneuvering, active reconnaissance, and long-range strikes and are considered key asymmetric combat power for defense operations.
3. The model simulation design of this case refers to the "U.S. Army Tactical Manual" and can wipe out 70% of an enemy's landing force. In such a way, the enemy cannot effectively carry out landing operations, which was the basis for determining overall combat requirements. Furthermore, it also considered enemy threat trends, indigenous production capability, and national financial conditions before putting forward general procurement requirements to the United States, including weapons equipment specifications, quantities, and procurement methods.
4. The acquisition of various weapons and equipment by the Armed Forces, including items and quantities, is based on enemy threat, military strategy, overall defense concepts, needs of the three-service joint operations, and professional and prudential assessment and planning. Therefore, the report is inconsistent with the facts, and the command hereby clarifies as mentioned above.