Yesterday was 228 Memorial Day. However, over the past eight years, since former president Lee Teng-hui (
First, it is imperative for the public realize that what happened on Feb. 28 56 years ago was not an isolated and random infliction of violence by a government on its people.
There were many contributing factors to the event, ranging from ethnic tension between the Taiwanese and the Chinese mainlanders, the depression and the corruption and autocracy of the KMT regime, among others. On the other hand, the incident can been seen as formally beginning an era of White Terror and government oppression that lasted until a little over a decade ago.
The day symbolizes the oppression of an alien regime against the people of Taiwan. In this regard, it makes sense for the DPP to choose the 228 Memorial Day as the day to remember the Kaohsiung Incident, to make public de-classified files on the incident and demand an apology from PFP Chairman James Soong (
The pan-blue camp has also criticized the DPP of selectively focusing on the Kaohsiung Incident for political consideration, since many former victims and participants of the incident now play important roles in the DPP government. The pan-blue camp has also argued that reclassification of files of the 228 Incident and the White Terror era deserve more attention. But, one cannot help but think that this is perhaps because the Kaohsiung Incident, which occurred only a little over two decades ago, is simply too close in time for the many current pan-blue leaders, such as Soong, to evade responsibility.
Soong has adopted an embarrassingly evasive attitude toward his part of his past. It is true that in order to move on the people of Taiwan must learn to forgive those who have wronged them. But, isn't an admission of wrong by the wrongdoers a precondition to forgiveness? If there was no wrong, what is there to forgive? This is true irrespective of whether the wrong was the 228 Incident, the Formosa Incident, or the Kaohsiung Incident.
Many pan-blue camp members who helped the old KMT regime oppress the people characterized what happened as "a historical tragedy," playing down their own roles and perhaps implying they had no choice about doing the things they did.
But, even if they truly disapproved of the government's wrongdoing, just like everyone else, they had three options -- one, stand up against it; two, keep quiet but take no part in it; and finally, give disgruntled assistance.
It goes without saying what these three options respectively reflect about the moral characters of the ones who take them. While those who chose option one were clearly heros and those who chose option two were ordinary people, those who chose option three were at least accomplices.
If there is anything that should be learned from the 228 Incident, the White Terror era and the Kaohsiung Incident, it should be the priceless value of democracy. It is the only way that a government can sustain power without resorting to bloodshed, violence and gun barrels. The day also reminds us that the nation's democracy today was not without a costly price, giving everyone even more reason to appreciate democracy, freedoms and human rights.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS