On Sunday, a group of academics published a report entitled The 228 Incident: A Report on Responsibility that claims former president Chiang Kai-shek (
The report, financed by the government-funded 228 Memorial Foundation and headed by Academia Historica President Chang Yen-hsien (
After it came to power in 2000, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government declared Feb. 28 a national holiday to commemorate the 1947 incident. The tragedy had been the subject of a massive cover-up by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) regime, and the misinformation disseminated as a result has led to distrust and tensions between various ethnic groups.
The report's clarification of the incident, in which many of Taiwan's intellectual elite were massacred, is necessary to put a stop to self-serving politicians or political parties exploiting misconceptions about Taiwan's past to exacerbate social divisions, instead of allowing people to learn something from this tragic event.
Not least among the lessons to be learned is that of forgiveness. But while knowing the truth may allow us to forgive, we must never forget, and those with blood on their hands should not be venerated as heroes.
In 1947, Chiang, who was orchestrating the war against the Chinese Communists from Nanjing, sent a division of the Nationalist Army to Taiwan in response to the 228 Incident. The troops landed in early March and proceeded to slaughter any dissidents, or those who had been framed as such, islandwide in a wave of cruel suppression that continued until after Chiang himself arrived in 1949.
Chiang then introduced martial law. This helped him to consolidate the power of the KMT through the White Terror era, to which both Taiwanese and Mainlanders who had followed the Nationalist Army over from China fell victim. The prison on Green Island (
Whether or not the contents of this report are accepted by Chiang's descendants, they will serve as evidence in a public debate on the 228 Incident. This may lead to a more comprehensive understanding of what actually happened. For example, the true number of victims remains a mystery.
Regardless of whether one agrees with the report's findings or not, the public can learn an important lesson -- namely that even governments cannot escape the judgement of history, and while crimes can be hidden for a time, most will eventually be revealed.
More importantly, Taiwanese should be able to use this incident as a point of reference in debate over the future of cross-strait relations. History tells us that every foreign government that has come to Taiwan -- be it the Qing dynasty, the Japanese, or the Chiangs -- has brought bloodshed in its wake. On the basis of this understanding, it is fair to ask whether, under the unified rule of a communist China, Taiwan has any guarantee of dignity or a secure future.
US$18.278 billion is a simple dollar figure; one that’s illustrative of the first Trump administration’s defense commitment to Taiwan. But what does Donald Trump care for money? During President Trump’s first term, the US defense department approved gross sales of “defense articles and services” to Taiwan of over US$18 billion. In September, the US-Taiwan Business Council compared Trump’s figure to the other four presidential administrations since 1993: President Clinton approved a total of US$8.702 billion from 1993 through 2000. President George W. Bush approved US$15.614 billion in eight years. This total would have been significantly greater had Taiwan’s Kuomintang-controlled Legislative Yuan been cooperative. During
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in recent days was the focus of the media due to his role in arranging a Chinese “student” group to visit Taiwan. While his team defends the visit as friendly, civilized and apolitical, the general impression is that it was a political stunt orchestrated as part of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) propaganda, as its members were mainly young communists or university graduates who speak of a future of a unified country. While Ma lived in Taiwan almost his entire life — except during his early childhood in Hong Kong and student years in the US —
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers on Monday unilaterally passed a preliminary review of proposed amendments to the Public Officers Election and Recall Act (公職人員選罷法) in just one minute, while Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators, government officials and the media were locked out. The hasty and discourteous move — the doors of the Internal Administration Committee chamber were locked and sealed with plastic wrap before the preliminary review meeting began — was a great setback for Taiwan’s democracy. Without any legislative discussion or public witnesses, KMT Legislator Hsu Hsin-ying (徐欣瑩), the committee’s convener, began the meeting at 9am and announced passage of the
In response to a failure to understand the “good intentions” behind the use of the term “motherland,” a professor from China’s Fudan University recklessly claimed that Taiwan used to be a colony, so all it needs is a “good beating.” Such logic is risible. The Central Plains people in China were once colonized by the Mongolians, the Manchus and other foreign peoples — does that mean they also deserve a “good beating?” According to the professor, having been ruled by the Cheng Dynasty — named after its founder, Ming-loyalist Cheng Cheng-kung (鄭成功, also known as Koxinga) — as the Kingdom of Tungning,
RSS