Investigate 228 criminals
Right after arriving in Taiwan in the spring of 1947, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) troops started what is now known as the 228 Incident by machine-gunning Taiwanese indiscriminately on streets, executing many of the local elite in public, shooting wire-strung Taiwanese in groups and dumping bodies into the sea. In these scenes, KMT troops — an Allied occupation force — participated in slaughtering peaceful protesters.
This constitutes an ethnic cleansing of Taiwanese by Chinese — it is an atrocity, like those committed by the Nazis against the Jews and by the Khmer Rouge against Cambodians.
The Nazi leadership faced Allied tribunals for their crimes, while Khmer Rouge officials are being held responsible by the UN-backed Cambodia Tribunal.
However, to this day, not a single KMT official has taken responsibility or stood trial for the brutal crime against humanity that was the 228 Massacre.
To whitewash the Incident, the KMT government designated Feb. 28 — the day the 1947 massacre began — as national Peace Memorial Day and provided tax-funded indemnity to the victims’ families. Recently, the party’s premier called the incident “a careless mistake” and apologists deemed the atrocity “a minor case.”
Despite this, many Taiwanese still attached themselves to the KMT and benefited from its association. Despite this, many Taiwanese live as second-class citizens and work like slaves to support the KMT government, which uses their tax dollars to subsidize an 18 percent interest rate for its support base.
Sixty-seven years have passed since that fateful spring and there has still not been justice for those killed in the slaughter. Perhaps Taiwanese need to find another venue in which to air their grievances and take the case to the International Court of Justice in The Hague.
Only when justice is served will 228 Memorial Day truly be a peaceful day for the victims of the massacre and for Taiwanese in general.
John Yang
Ohio
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
The Hong Kong government on Monday gazetted sweeping amendments to the implementation rules of Article 43 of its National Security Law. There was no legislative debate, no public consultation and no transition period. By the time the ink dried on the gazette, the new powers were already in force. This move effectively bypassed Hong Kong’s Legislative Council. The rules were enacted by the Hong Kong chief executive, in conjunction with the Committee for Safeguarding National Security — a body shielded from judicial review and accountable only to Beijing. What is presented as “procedural refinement” is, in substance, a shift away from
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
The shifting geopolitical tectonic plates of this year have placed Beijing in a profound strategic dilemma. As Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) prepares for a high-stakes summit with US President Donald Trump, the traditional power dynamics of the China-Japan-US triangle have been destabilized by the diplomatic success of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi in Washington. For the Chinese leadership, the anxiety is two-fold: There is a visceral fear of being encircled by a hardened security alliance, and a secondary risk of being left in a vulnerable position by a transactional deal between Washington and Tokyo that might inadvertently empower Japan
RSS