Martial law era stings still smart
Yesterday marked the 25th anniversary of the lifting of martial law. In this quarter century, Taiwan has evolved into a full-fledged democracy and made significant progress toward respect for human rights.
Looking back on the occasion now, the public had already begun to challenge martial law through growing opposition and street protests in the 1980s. The lifting of martial law by former president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) in 1987 was a response to inevitable social changes.
The end of martial law led to freedom of speech, assembly and expression. Social movements have thrived over the past decades, pushing forward reforms in various fields, from labor rights, gender equality and agricultural developments to environmental protection, through both clashes and peaceful sit-ins.
Though the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was formed illegally in 1986 before martial law restrictions were revoked, the election of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the DPP in 2000 forced the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) into opposition for the first time in its history and completed the nation’s first peaceful transition of power.
So much progress has been made over the past 25 years. However, more efforts are needed to deal with the legacy of martial law.
Martial law was declared by Chiang Ching-kuo’s father, Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), in 1949 after the then-KMT regime in China was defeated by the Chinese Communist Party in a civil war and retreated to Taiwan. During the Martial Law era, thousands of people were arrested, imprisoned, tortured and murdered by the KMT government to suppress dissent.
The government’s violence against civilians in the White Terror, the 228 Massacre and other tragedies are a collective memory of dark and painful days for Taiwanese.
In an annual ceremony held to commemorate victims who lost their lives or were deprived of their freedom during the era, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), who doubles as KMT chairman, yesterday reiterated an apology to the victims and their families, pledging to prevent similar incidents in the future.
He stressed the importance of the nation’s democratic system and peaceful cross-strait relations in preventing such tragedies, while vowing to continue promoting cross-strait relations to avoid a war.
As Ma and the KMT continue to focus their efforts on closer economic ties with China, they should remember that China is still an autocracy, while Taiwan has developed into a democracy. Developing economic relations with China is not the ultimate solution to our economic recession, and Beijing’s notorious human rights record is certainly the opposite direction of what Taiwan is pursuing in the post-Martial Law era.
Ma emphasized his determination to atone for the KMT’s past mistakes with his public apology. However, little progress has been made in uncovering the truths behind the incidents.
As a party that continues to insist on a party-state mechanism, the KMT obviously has not learned from its past mistakes and is not ready to fully repair the damage it has done.
The DPP, on the other hand, has also failed to help bring Taiwanese a better tomorrow, as it made few contributions to the nation during the eight years of its administration.
Both the KMT and the DPP should be blamed for obstructing the nation’s developments with bipartisanship in politics. As the lifting of martial law 25 years ago came in response to the public’s demand for change, it is, therefore, important for Taiwanese to demonstrate people power and demand that political parties improve their performance and work harder to bring about a better future for Taiwan.
US aerospace company Boeing Co has in recent years been involved in numerous safety incidents, including crashes of its 737 Max airliners, which have caused widespread concern about the company’s safety record. It has recently come to light that titanium jet engine parts used by Boeing and its European competitor Airbus SE were sold with falsified documentation. The source of the titanium used in these parts has been traced back to an unknown Chinese company. It is clear that China is trying to sneak questionable titanium materials into the supply chain and use any ensuing problems as an opportunity to
It’s not every month that the US Department of State sends two deputy assistant secretary-level officials to Taiwan, together. Its rarer still that such senior State Department policy officers, once on the ground in Taipei, make a point of huddling with fellow diplomats from “like-minded” NATO, ANZUS and Japanese governments to coordinate their multilateral Taiwan policies. The State Department issued a press release on June 22 admitting that the two American “representatives” had “hosted consultations in Taipei” with their counterparts from the “Taiwan Ministry of Foreign Affairs.” The consultations were blandly dubbed the “US-Taiwan Working Group on International Organizations.” The State
The Chinese Supreme People’s Court and other government agencies released new legal guidelines criminalizing “Taiwan independence diehard separatists.” While mostly symbolic — the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never had jurisdiction over Taiwan — Tamkang University Graduate Institute of China Studies associate professor Chang Wu-ueh (張五岳), an expert on cross-strait relations, said: “They aim to explain domestically how they are countering ‘Taiwan independence,’ they aim to declare internationally their claimed jurisdiction over Taiwan and they aim to deter Taiwanese.” Analysts do not know for sure why Beijing is propagating these guidelines now. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), deciphering the
Delegation-level visits between the two countries have become an integral part of transformed relations between India and the US. Therefore, the visit by a bipartisan group of seven US lawmakers, led by US House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs Chairman Michael McCaul to India from June 16 to Thursday last week would have largely gone unnoticed in India and abroad. However, the US delegation’s four-day visit to India assumed huge importance this time, because of the meeting between the US lawmakers and the Dalai Lama. This in turn brings us to the focal question: How and to what extent