To understand Taiwanese politics, it is necessary to comprehend the political earthquake set off by the 228 Incident. US president Richard Nixon said in 1972 that he did not know what the Taiwan independence movement was. Today, the US administration says it does not support measures by Taiwan to clearly distinguish itself from China. One reason for this is that they do not understand the history behind the scars left on the Taiwanese people by the 228 Incident.
To deal with this situation, the Brookings Institution organized a symposium last Thursday to discuss the political implications of 228 in the hopes of facilitating the understanding in US academic circles of "Taiwan consciousness" and demands for normalizing Taiwan's national status.
The 228 Incident marked the beginning of Taiwan's independence movement and it represents a crucial watershed in Taiwanese politics. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) was responsible for mass slaughter, and the US, which stood by and did nothing, must accept moral responsibility.
The KMT has shifted blame for the incident onto Chen Yi (陳儀), then executive administrator of Taiwan, and attempted to brush over 228 by saying that it was the result of a simple misunderstanding caused by the language barrier. It has no intention of acknowledging its responsibility.
The crackdown on tobacco smuggling was the spark that set off the incident, but the primary reason was the KMT's corruption, impotence and political and economic monopolies which had led to growing public outcry.
Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek (
Even as his troops were slaughtering Taiwanese, Chiang voiced support for Chen's actions at a meeting of the KMT's Central Committee. When he finally ordered the execution of Chen a few years later, it was not because of 228, but because Chen was accused of allying himself with the Chinese Communist Party.
After the 228 Incident, Taiwanese intellectuals put four requests for assistance to the US consulate in Taipei. They asked that the US stop Chiang from deploying troops in Taiwan; that the consulate help reveal the truth of the incident to the world; that the US urge the UN to place Taiwan under UN trusteeship and help sever the political and economic relations between Taiwan and China until the realization of Taiwan independence; and that the US pressure Chiang to investigate and resolve the issue.
These intellectuals blamed the US for handing Taiwan to China. They hoped the US would help Taiwan seek UN intervention. The US consul, however, refused to intervene in "a conflict between two Chinese ethnic groups." The then US ambassador to China merely relayed a request to Chiang to dispatch officials to Taiwan to investigate the incident. The ambassador also submitted the US' report on the incident.
Former American Institute in Taiwan chairman Richard Bush believes the US should at least have stopped Chiang from sending troops to Taiwan and put pressure on Chen to negotiate with Taiwanese representatives. The US' decision to remain neutral created an even greater tragedy. It thus cannot avoid moral responsibility for the 228 Incident.
Sixty years later, the regime responsible for slaughtering Taiwanese has been eliminated by voters, and Taiwanese still hope that the US will recognize and protect this nascent democracy. The US missed an earlier opportunity by ignoring justice. It should do good now by giving Taiwanese belated justice.
Shen Chieh is a journalist based in the US.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti
It is employment pass renewal season in Singapore, and the new regime is dominating the conversation at after-work cocktails on Fridays. From September, overseas employees on a work visa would need to fulfill the city-state’s new points-based system, and earn a minimum salary threshold to stay in their jobs. While this mirrors what happens in other countries, it risks turning foreign companies away, and could tarnish the nation’s image as a global business hub. The program was announced in 2022 in a bid to promote fair hiring practices. Points are awarded for how a candidate’s salary compares with local peers, along
China last month enacted legislation to punish —including with the death penalty — “die-hard Taiwanese independence separatists.” The country’s leaders, including Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), need to be reminded about what the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has said and done in the past. They should think about whether those historical figures were also die-hard advocates of Taiwanese independence. The Taiwanese Communist Party was established in the Shanghai French Concession in April 1928, with a political charter that included the slogans “Long live the independence of the Taiwanese people” and “Establish a republic of Taiwan.” The CCP sent a representative, Peng
Japan and the Philippines on Monday signed a defense agreement that would facilitate joint drills between them. The pact was made “as both face an increasingly assertive China,” and is in line with Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr’s “effort to forge security alliances to bolster the Philippine military’s limited ability to defend its territorial interests in the South China Sea,” The Associated Press (AP) said. The pact also comes on the heels of comments by former US deputy national security adviser Matt Pottinger, who said at a forum on Tuesday last week that China’s recent aggression toward the Philippines in
The Ministry of National Defense on Tuesday announced that the military would hold its annual Han Kuang exercises from July 22 to 26. Military officers said the exercises would feature unscripted war games, and a decentralized command and control structure. This year’s exercises underline the recent reforms in Taiwan’s military as it transitions from a top-down command structure to one where autonomy is pushed down to the front lines to improve decisionmaking and adaptability. Militaries around the world have been observing and studying Russia’s war in Ukraine. They have seen that the Ukrainian military has been much quicker to adapt to