Moving beyond militarization

University-level conflict defense teaching requires reform

Bibliographic Data

ID21691601
AuthorsYann-Ru Ho (0000-0001-6437-7315, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, corresponding author)
Year2026
Volume31
Issue3
Pages638-647
Publication date2026-04-03
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueTeaching in Higher Education (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1356-2517 • E-ISSN: 1470-1294
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/13562517.2025.2598755
OpenAlexW7109518291
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited16

In conflict regions, educational institutions often implement defense education against violence and foster solidarity. The Taiwan Strait is an example of such a conflict area, and Taiwan has implemented university-level defense education since the 1950s. This point of departure article uses Taiwan as a contextualized example to examine how university-level defense education defines and teaches conflict. A critical concept, culture of war and culture of peace, by the United Nations is utilized for analysis (UN General Assembly Citation1998). In Taiwan’s defense education, competing definitions of conflict exist; one pinpoints conflict as military strife and another as local ethnic diversity. The curriculum advocates for understanding ethnic differences and solidarity, yet actual pedagogies include military training, maintaining a culture of war. Via critical reflection on the misalignment between conflict definitions and teachings, this article contends that National Defense Education could be reformed to eschew militarism and envisions implications for peacebuilding curricula worldwide

Conflict resolution · Higher education · Qualitative research · Teaching method · Anthropology: Ethics, History, Culture · Flannery O'Connor and Thomas Merton · Peace and Human Rights Education

Tools

Open DOI