When a memorial to Chen Wen-chen (陳文成) at National Taiwan University (NTU) was dedicated in February after a decade of campaigning, many were surprised that the plaque was made of polystyrene foam. The placeholder, which was removed after three days, read: “In memoriam of a hero who unyieldingly resisted state violence.”
Apparently, many of the decisionmakers at the university disagreed with the phrase “state violence,” so no text has been displayed for the past few months, which is a shame given NTU’s colorful history and what Taiwanese endured to achieve its free and democratic environment.
On Saturday, NTU finally approved the text after student representatives brought the issue to an online vote, winning 74 to 64.
Some professors who voted against the text cited the need to “maintain tranquility on campus” — an egregious statement, as more people in Taiwan should learn about the atrocities that the previous authoritarian regime has committed.
Tranquility is achieved by acknowledging history and reaching an understanding, not by ignoring issues.
Chen, an assistant professor of mathematics at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, was visiting family in Taiwan when he was found dead near a library at NTU on July 3, 1981.
The state ruled it a suicide, and although the facts are not entirely clear, evidence indicates that he was killed and thrown off the building, possibly by state security from the Taiwan Garrison Command, the then-Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government’s main instrument for its nearly four-decade-long reign of White Terror. Chen was detained and interrogated the night before his body was found.
The authorities claimed that Chen killed himself out of guilt for his “crimes” — ie, supporting Taiwan’s democracy movement. He was reportedly marked for donating money to Formosa Magazine, a major opposition publication that was the flashpoint of the Kaohsiung Incident two years earlier.
Chen was reportedly followed and harassed following his return, and even blocked from returning to the US on schedule.
Even if he were not killed by authorities, what he and countless others who opposed authoritarian rule endured was most definitely state violence. Even though the evidence is not clear on what happened to Chen, so many others were executed, incarcerated or simply “disappeared” that there is nothing controversial about the phrase “state violence.”
Yet, decades after martial law was lifted, it still took a lot of work by the Chen Wen-chen Memorial Foundation and students to get the memorial built. In 2019, the university even rescinded its offer to fund half of the memorial on the grounds that it is a sensitive political topic. In addition, NTU reportedly tried to keep the dedication ceremony as low-key as possible.
Even though university campuses were a major part of the government’s propaganda activities, students at NTU have long been on the forefront of fighting for the nation’s democracy. State violence against its students was committed as early as 1949 during the April 6 Incident, and in 1986 its students launched Taiwan’s first major campus movement calling for freedom of speech and direct representative elections.
Given this history, NTU should embrace the role its students played in democratization instead of hampering their efforts.
Fortunately, the text was approved, otherwise the blank space would have continued to be an insult to those who fought against state violence.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS