Your newspaper is to be commended for its integrity in uncovering the true nature of Taiwan's human rights abuses committed by the KMT forces while under the Supreme Command of the Allied Powers during the period 1945-51. Prior to the formal Japanese surrender of Taiwan, this period of administrative authority was unofficially conducted under General Douglas MacArthur. Articles such as "Taiwan's Deepest Scar" (Features, Feb. 25, page 17) have begun to expose the abuses committed by the Chiang regimes while acting as military governors under US occupational tutelage. Contrary to belief, that period of military occupation was never formally concluded between the US and ROC, and therein lies an intriguing footnote of history with very complex legal issues involving the 228 Incident.
Despite the ROC claims to Taiwan after the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty (SFPT), the placing of Taiwan's international status under SFPT's occupational terms made for serious conflict over its status. The SFPT is not only a peace treaty but the highest legal authority for the "occupational jurisdiction" which placed the Taiwan concession by Japanese surrender into the specific jurisdiction of certain related US laws such as the beloved "human rights clause" of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA). Because of the SFPT and TRA, the military occupational jurisdiction of Taiwan is still considered valid, and thus Taiwan is quite possibly subject to the judiciary jurisdiction of the US Supreme Court for human rights violations by military personnel.
In 1900, the US Supreme Court ruled on a series of landmark cases called the Insular Cases. These cases collectively ruled on the status of all foreign territories ceded into the administrative jurisdiction of the US military government as often provided for by a treaty. In 1898, the US secured Cuban independence from Spain in the Treaty of Paris. However, the US Supreme Court ruled in Neely versus Hankel that the "Republic of Cuba" was not yet a de jure country but instead a "foreign territory" held under indefinite military occupation.
This occupational trusteeship of the "Cuba status" so closely parallels the "Taiwan status" that it is quite remarkable proof that legal history does repeat itself.
With regard to human rights violations, the Insular Cases ruled in Downes versus Bidwell that certain "basic constitutional rights" applied to the local inhabitants of ceded "foreign territories" held in the trust of an occupational jurisdiction. These legal rights to "life, liberty and property" were held to be the legal equivalent of constitutional rights extended to Chinese aliens residing in sovereign US territories under the notorious Chinese Exclusion Act.
As basic as these rights were under the US Constitution, Congress foresaw the need to promise an "enhancement" of these rights under the TRA. It does seem that the occupational status of Taiwan has a silver lining which legal practitioners need to further explore with regard to seeking financial restitution on behalf of the victims of KMT torture and genocide. Such violations occurred under the supreme command of General MacArthur during a period of military occupation. The human rights of people of Taiwan are inalienable and they deserve some justice now.
Jeff Geer
Las Vegas, Nevada
Uncomfortable issue
I was watching TV the other day when a reporter asked Vice President Annette Lu
I think it would be a shame if we were to just look at these statements as an unfortunate but understandable interpretation of history by men who grew up during the Japanese occupation of Taiwan. This incident teaches us something about confronting the past. The KMT has had to face a painful reexamination of its 55-year rule over Taiwan because of democracy. I think the comfort women issue has shown us that the attitudes held by some people about the Japanese occupation need to be examined as well. If the government stays silent, it runs the risk of appearing to tacitly accept these beliefs and further contributing to the polarization of society.
William Hoyle
Taichung
It could very well be true that Kobayashi Yoshinori's (
Indeed, a quick flick through Japanese high school history books should be sufficient to convince even Japanophiles that, to this day, the government is still in denial. Not only do schoolchildren not learn the truth, the government has done its very best to ensure that all citizens grow up thinking that they were the victims, not the perpetrators of World War II.
I do not believe that resolving the comfort women issue need necessarily escalate into all-out anti-Japanese sentiment. Nor should the appeal for an official apology from Japan be perceived as unfair targeting of the younger generations of Japanese. This is not Japan-bashing. This is about doing what is right and bringing about justice.
Moreover, just as it is important for the women that justice heal the wounds caused by past atrocities, it is also of paramount importance that Japan's younger generation learn the truth, lest history repeat itself. As for those inept, morally bankrupt politicians from the opposition parties who are taking advantage of the comfort women issue to serve their own petty political agenda, I urge them not to indulge in selective amnesia. They should not forget that their predecessors also committed heinous crimes against humanity in more than 50 years of autocratic control of Taiwan -- atrocities for which we have yet to demand formal apologies. We have survived the invasions of the Dutch, Spanish, Japanese and the KMT! If we are looking to build a better country, however, we must first bring about justice and set the record straight, so that the younger generations will be proud to call themselves Taiwanese.
Jennifer Chen
Melbourne, Australia.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.