Morals have been neglected during Taiwan's democratization because the government and society have ignored the issue of historical justice.
The Chen Wen-chen Incident (
At that time, the KMT government claimed that Chen had committed suicide, however, an autopsy performed by an American forensics expert disputed this conclusion.
But history is not without irony. A few days ago, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) said at an international press conference that the autopsy on Chen was conducted by foreign experts, adding that foreign professionals helped clarify suspicions and showed good faith to the nation. Are these really the facts?
Lies are once again being spread by Lien and Soong, who at the time of Chen's death were high-ranking officials. They make us feel ashamed.
Chen had returned to Taiwan during the Martial Law era. An outstanding Taiwanese, he returned to visit his wife and son after signing a three-year contract to teach at Carnegie Mellon University in Pennsylvania. With his aspirations and a love for Taiwan, Chen had no reason to kill himself. His corpse was found at his old university.
After an autopsy by domestic coroners, an investigation by Taipei District prosecutors and a review by the Control Yuan, the official explanation was: "There is no evidence of murder. Accidental death or suicide are probable."
The distressed family of Chen, particularly his wife, Chen Su-jen (
The murder of Chen took place within two years of the tragedy in which former DPP chairman Lin I-hsiung's (林義雄) family was killed.
Lin's six-year-old twin daughters were brutally murdered along with their grandmother on Feb. 28, 1980. His eldest daughter, then nine-years old, was severely injured in the attack but survived.
No arrests have been made in the case. Lin and many Taiwanese believe the attack was politically motivated.
These cases darkened Taiwan's political outlook. Despite being stunned and startled, many Tai-wanese, both inside and outside the country, sought to redress the these wrongs.
Carnegie Mellon president Richard Cyert sent Morris DeGroot of the department of statistics and forensics expert
Dr. Cyril Wecht to Taipei to carry out an autopsy on Chen. After they dissected Chen's frozen body, they concluded: "Chen Wen-chen was a victim of murder. Unconscious, he was pushed down to his death from a fire ladder."
Soong, then director of the Government Information Office, obstructed redress in every possible way. Although he knew that the two Americans came to conduct an autopsy, Soong insisted that Associated Press reporter Tina Chou (周清月) replace the word "autopsy" in her stories with the phrase "inspection of Chen's body." Soong later cancelled Chou's reporter's license and deported her.
The ghost of authoritarianism continues to haunt the nation. On International Human Rights Day last December the PFP hindered Chou from visiting Taiwan and speaking at a conference held by the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy. Soong and the PFP's actions are to be condemned.
To restore the truth, Chen's violent death must be explained. Lien and Soong's allegation that the autopsy was conducted by domestic and foreign experts is a sheer lie. Instead of reflecting on political persecution by the KMT and apologizing for having interfered with the autopsy, Lien and Soong cited the Chen Wen-chen Incident as a pretext for the use of foreign forensics experts, hoping to further their demands for an independent investigation of the March 19 shooting of President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁). Nothing could be more preposterous.
If Lien and Soong still have any conscience left, they should come to the Chen Wen-chen Memorial Foundation to apologize in person within 48 hours.
While in power, the KMT had prevented the foundation from registering under this name.
Yet history manifests itself. Without any awareness of history, the persecutors during the age of totalitarianism brazenly lie in public. In light of their past behavior, they lied deliberately in order to try to win the presidency. But their lies cannot whitewash the history of oppression of 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