On May 18, 1980, students in Gwangju, South Korea, rallied against martial law. The Gwangju Uprising was soon suppressed, as then-South Korean general Chun Doo-hwan sent in troops to crush the protests. Consequently, 154 people were killed, 70 people disappeared and 3,028 were injured.
Fortunately, thanks to photographs taken by German reporter Jurgen Hinzpeter, the world learned the truth. After Chun became South Korean president later that year, the uprising was defined as a rebellion instigated by communists and their sympathizers.
The similarities between events in South Korea and Taiwan’s 228 Incident are remarkable. Both culminated in numerous deaths, and both governments utilized the same rhetoric and narrative to frame the social movement as a rebellion instigated by communists.
One thing is different, though. After his presidential term ended, Chun was on Dec. 3, 1995, arrested on charges of conspiracy and insurrection. Although he denied that he ordered military forces to suppress the protests, Chun was sentenced to life in prison.
In the 1990s, victims of the uprising were compensated. More than 200 teachers and a dozen professors who were laid off during the uprising won a lawsuit in which they demanded compensation from the South Korean government.
On the other hand, although many more people were killed in the 228 Incident — a number that could be 100 times higher than in the Gwangju Uprising — no perpetrators have been tracked down. After 76 years, the slaughterers have not been summoned to stand trial, let alone be convicted.
An even greater difference is how the slaughterers’ descendants reacted. On Friday last week, Chun’s grandson Chun Woo-won knelt down and apologized for what his grandfather had done.
Women who lost their loved ones during the Gwangju Uprising — also known as the “mothers of May — accepted Chun Woo-won’s apology, embracing him in tears.
It was a perfect example of transitional justice. The perpetrators, or their descendants, apologize, and their victims, or their families, forgive them for their wrongdoings. Only thereafter can reconciliation between the two parties be reached.
Taiwan’s case is quite different. Given that the slaughterers of the 228 Incident have not been identified, the grandchildren (or great-grandchildren) of the perpetrators do not have to kneel down and apologize to the victims’ families.
Moreover, some have intentionally distorted the truth, claiming that the 228 Incident was merely an act of pacification rather than a massacre. Some have asked the public to look forward rather than backward. If so, what is the purpose of teaching history in compulsory education? For some, the perpetrators do not have to apologize for their wrongdoings, and the victims should simply reconcile with them.
The 228 Incident is a typical event showcasing the violence of the state. Today, after 76 years, it will be difficult to discover and preserve direct evidence.
During the Sunflower movement in 2014, even though then-premier Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺) said that police on March 24 did not use excessive force to evict students from the Executive Yuan, photographs and video footage from the scene proved otherwise. Students were severely beaten; civilians were covered with blood.
Evidence has shown that the “324” incident is a demonstration of state violence. After nine years, the Control Yuan has finally issued corrective notices over the failures of the Executive Yuan, the Ministry of the Interior, the National Police Agency, the Taipei Police Department and the Taipei District Prosecutors’ Office. Yet it is still highly doubtful whether the perpetrators will be brought to court.
Apparently, Taiwan still has a long way to go to achieve transitional justice.
Chang Kuo-tsai is a retired National Hsinchu University of Education associate professor.
Translated by Emma Liu
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS