A recent study, the 228 Incident: A Report on Responsibility names the dictator Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) as the prime culprit, giving the backing of academic research to something everyone already knew. It told us nothing new.
However, Chiang's grandson, John Chiang (蔣孝嚴), together with Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), have offered as "counter-evidence" to this proposition the order Chiang Kai-shek gave to Chen Yi (陳儀), then Taiwan executive administrator, on March 13, 1947, which read, "Any retaliation on the part of military administration officials should be strictly prohibited, and anything to the contrary dealt with as acting against orders." This, they contend, is proof that Chiang Kai-shek was not the prime culprit.
One has to question why Chiang Kai-shek included the word "should." It reveals that Chen didn't prohibit anything, and that the "retaliation" was already in progress. This is why Chiang Kai-shek used that word. He meant that Chen should do something -- prohibit retaliation -- that in fact he hadn't done.
Chiang never made this order on his own. It was in response to the situation. On the date in question, March 13, Yang Liang-kung (楊亮公), who had been sent by the Control Yuan in China to monitor the situation in Taiwan, sent a message to Yu You-ren (于右任), then president of the Control Yuan, saying, "As the local government's random arrests have disquieted civilians, I would like to suggest that you forward a request to the central government that it give the local government strict orders to refrain from retaliatory measures."
Upon receiving Yang's message, Yu immediately sent him a reply, saying "I have reported to the chairman [Chiang Kai-shek] on what you saw there."
Before sending his reply to Yang, Yu informed Chiang Kai-shek, who immediately responded by issuing an order. That is, Chiang's order was issued as a show for the Control Yuan. However, such an order is inadequate to prove that Chiang is not the main culprit in the 228 Incident.
According to Denny Roy's Taiwan: A Political History, Chiang gave Chen two orders. One was made public while the other was not. The undisclosed one tells Chen to be tough and "slaughter them all in a secretive manner." The author's sources are listed in a footnote on page 71 of the book. This assumption should not come as a surprise, for this was Chiang Kai-shek's standard tactic. It is sufficient evidence that Chiang Kai-shek directed the suppression of the unrest.
Why was Chiang Kai-shek so determined to slaughter the Taiwanese? At the time of the 228 Incident, Chiang Kai-shek wrote in his diary that "Communists and ambitious politicians are instigating the public."
A look at the overall situation shows that in January 1947, the ceasefire agreement between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) was broken, in February, the CCP launched a massive attack on Jilin Province and civil war seemed imminent. Chiang connected the incident in Taiwan with "communists" thus determining his view of the character of the 228 incident and setting the tone for how to deal with it. On March 10, Chiang wired Chen, asking him to remain in his post although Chen had already expressed his wish to resign to take responsibility for the incident. In the telegram, Chiang said "There are reports that the undercover communists in Taiwan gradually are coming into play. We should take strict pre-emptive measures to prevent this from happening and cannot leave a single cell to jeopardize the future."
Ko Yuan-fen (柯遠芬), then head of the Taiwan Garrison, said straight out that "there is no doubt that the communists are the masterminds behind this political conspiracy." He strictly enforced the idea of "rather unjustly killing 99 innocent as long as he could kill a true [communist]." This attitude completely tallied with Chiang's motive. No wonder Chiang was so ruthless, for the massacre resulting from the 228 Incident was a link in the civil war between the KMT and the CCP.
It was Chiang Kai-shek who directed the suppression of the unrest following from the 228 Incident. On May 7, he dispatched Liu Yu-ching (劉雨卿), the commander of the 21st Division, to travel to Taiwan to maintain order. Officially, Liu was under the command of Chen, but he was in fact taking orders directly from Chiang.
Authors Lai Tse-han (
Chiang only trusted his own henchmen, and he was the only one who could direct them. Liu was under Chiang's direct orders to quell the unrest in Taiwan and that is why he reported directly to Chiang. Pai only relayed Chiang's orders to Liu.
Over the years, more and more information about the 228 Incident has been revealed. The KMT cannot cover up the truth of whether or not Chiang was the main culprit behind the incident. The evidence will tell its story.
Chin Heng-wei is the editor-in-chief of Contemporary Monthly magazine.
Translated by Paul Cooper and Daniel Cheng
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