國際透明組織下轄之國防與安全小組(TI-DSP)是全球迄今(2016)唯一從事 各國國防透明度與貪腐風險評估之非政府組織，其首度在2013年公布全球82 國之政府國防廉潔指數(Government Defence Anti-Corruption Index，以下簡稱 GDAI)。兩年後(2015)第二度公布全球115國之評比結果。 台灣在2013與2015兩次評比均居B級，意即國防貪腐風險低(low)。中國 則被評為D-級(2013)與E級(2015)，分別代表國防貪腐風險高(high)與非常高 (very high)。兩岸軍事實力相差懸殊，乍看之下似無可比較，但是鑒於兩岸自 1949年以來長期軍事對峙狀態尚未結束，雙方軍事貪腐風險將直接影響透明度 與課責，進而影響亞太區域和平。因此，本文進行兩岸國防透明度評比之比較， 具有實務上的必要性並在政策上可供兩岸決策者省思。 本文作者長期關注國防廉政建設並投入GDAI之實務倡議，對於該廉政績 效評估與指標建立之參與頗深。本研究運用文獻分析法與深度訪談等質化研究 方法，首先論述GDAI在全球治理視野下之重要性，其次分析台灣與中國在兩 次GDAI評比的強項與弱項(分為5構面共29項貪腐因子）。繼之以運用跨國比 較模式，最後就兩岸在國防反貪治理模式進行比較分析進而提出建議。 本文發現既有的公開資料無法確實揭露中共解放軍的客觀數據，在此高度 不透明的環境中。因此中國在GDAI之兩次評比等級似乎未必能反映其真實現 狀。然而就現有公開資料進行的評比可發現，解放軍在採購與軍事行動等兩構 面的貪腐風險最高，其17個題項零分代表有高度貪腐風險可能性。反觀台灣雖 然在政策面的預算項目相對公開透明，但在採購構面的貪腐風險亦值得重視。 基於同儕競爭效應，推動兩岸甚至亞太區域各國國防透明度具有政策上的重大 意義，尤其可以藉由提升透明度與降低國防貪腐風險，避免周邊國家誤判或誤 解，進而促成區域和平。

Transcendency International, an NGO, publishes the only index assessing global defense transparency and corruption risks. Its Government Defence Anti-Corruption Index(GDAI) ranking 82 countries in 2013 and 115 countries in 2015 respectively. While Taiwan was ranked band B(low defense risks) consecutively, China was D-(high defense risks) in 2013 and E (very high defense risks) in 2015. Considering the long-standing military tension across the Taiwan Straits, military corruption on both sides can and will jeopardize the peace and stability of Asia Pacific. The author compares and contrasts the defense transparency between Taiwan and China so as to generate the practical policy recommendations for decision makers. Based on the research and advocacy on defense corruption over the past five years, the author applies literature review and in-depth interview in this article to first summarize the importance of global governance and defense corruption, and then analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of Taiwan and China in five dimensions of the GDAI. A anti-corruption model comparison was presented and followed by policy recommendations. This article finds that current publicly-available information can not accurately disclosed Chinese PLA objective data. The ranking and scoring of the GDAI does not necessarily reflect China’s reality. Nonetheless, the PLA was scored 0 in 17 out of 77 questionnaire mainly across the operation and procurement dimensions. On the other hand, Taiwan also scored low in procurement while its defense budget is relatively open and transparent. Promoting defense transparency, as a result of peer competition, across Taiwan Straits serve the interests of all parties in Asia Pacific for the sake of avoiding miscalculation and ultimately contributing to the regional peace and stability. Building a minimum standard of defense transparency among Asia Pacific countries seem necessary in the long run.