後備戰力研究—比較主要國家後備制度與中華民國軍事訓練役

2022年蔡英文總統召開「強化全民國防兵力結構調整方案」記者會，宣布中華民國兵役制度進行重大調整，取消過去實行多年的4個月軍事訓練役制度，回復一年義務役。軍事訓練役原先目的在於平時養兵少，戰時用兵多，但在實施多年後，卻被認為無法達成基本戰力需求，其中原因為何?而為何訓練方式與軍事訓練役相似，強調短時訓練，戰時徵召的美國國民兵體制卻能持續存在並發揮成效?本文試圖分析兩者間的不同，以理解我國軍事訓練役政策為何無法延續。本文透過研究世界各國後備役制度，了解各國的後備役體制。並將其分為主動徵召式後備役與志願式後備役，以後備部隊預算、作戰能力、訓練過程等指標作為部隊成效，分析其後備部隊實際作為。透過國家政策，地緣政治等因素，了解這些國家為何使用主動徵召式後備役或志願式後備役。最後比對我國軍事訓練役與美國國民兵間的差別。研究中發現採用主動徵召式後備役的國家，面對周遭人口基數優勢的敵國或假想敵必須以徵召式後備役來彌補人數上的劣勢。或是常年與周遭國家有軍事衝突，都偏好使用徵召式後備役。採用志願式後備役的國家，則是因在多地區執行軍事任務導致全職軍人不足，將志願後備役作為輪替和補充軍力的手段。對志願後備部隊的態度也將其定位從戰略預備隊改為作戰預備隊。在後備部隊能力分析上，影響各國後部隊成效的重要關鍵的為國防預算，以及政府對於後備部隊的態度。預算是後備部隊訓練、招募、戰力提升重要的因素。政府態度則體現於對於後備部隊的招募、應用、實際部屬和訓練上。而我國與美國國民兵在預算上、政府態度上都有較大落差，同時也有文化與體制上的差異導致訓練不能落實。我國軍事訓練役不能構成戰力的因素在於訓練預算少，訓練沒有汰除機制。訓練期間較短，且缺乏有效的訓練制度，導致結訓役男被認為無法構成有效戰力。同時推動軍事訓練役導致軍隊人數短缺，導致國軍基層被眾多人力業務困擾，對戰力構成威脅，也是軍事訓練役取消的重要原因

關鍵字

軍事訓練役；後備部隊；美國國民兵；兵役制度

並列摘要

In 2022, President Tsai Ing-wen held a press conference on "Strengthening the National Defense Force Structure Adjustment Plan", announcing that the military service system of the Republic of China (ROC) will undergo a major adjustment by abolishing the four-month military training service system that has been in place for many years, and reinstating one year of voluntary service. The original purpose of the military training service was to raise fewer soldiers in times of peace and use them more in times of war, but after many years of implementation, it has been recognized that it cannot meet the basic needs of the war effort, what are the reasons for this? Why has the U.S. National Guard system, which emphasizes short-term training and wartime conscription in a manner similar to the Military Training Service, continued to exist and be effective? This paper attempts to analyze the differences between the two in order to understand why our military training service policy cannot be sustained. In this paper, we study the reserve systems of various countries in the world to understand their reserve systems. It also categorizes them into active reserve and voluntary reserve, and analyzes the actual behavior of their reserve forces by taking the budget, operational capability, and training process as indicators of their effectiveness. Through national policies and geopolitical factors, we will understand why these countries use active or voluntary reserves. Finally, the study compares the differences between our military training service and the U.S. National Guard. The study found that countries that use active reserve must compensate for their numerical disadvantage by recruiting in the face of an enemy or hypothetical enemy with a superior population base. Countries that are in constant military conflict with neighboring countries also prefer to use the conscripted reserve. Countries that have adopted the Volunteer Reserve have used it as a means of replenishing and replenishing their forces due to a shortage of full-time military personnel as a result of military missions in multiple regions. The attitude toward the volunteer reserve forces has also changed its position from strategic reserve forces to operational reserve forces. In the analysis of reserve force capabilities, the key factors affecting the effectiveness of the reserve forces in each country are the national defense budget and the government's attitude toward the reserve forces. The budget is an important factor in the training, recruitment, and capability enhancement of the reserve forces. The government's attitude is reflected in the recruitment, application, actual deployment, and training of the reserve forces. However, there is a big difference between our country and the U.S. National Militia in terms of budget and government attitude, as well as cultural and institutional differences that make training impossible to implement. The factors that prevent our military training services from becoming a force to be reckoned with are the small training budget and the lack of an elimination mechanism for training. The short training period and the lack of an effective training system have led to the conclusion of training for men who are not considered to be able to form an effective combat force. At the same time, the promotion of the military training service led to a shortage of military personnel, resulting in the National Army's grassroots being plagued by a multitude of manpower and business, which posed a threat to the war effort, and was also an important reason for the abolition of the military training service.