Whenever a politician visits a monument to honor a special person or event, there is always the possibility of controversy, because in history there are often at least two sides to a story. Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Taipei mayoral candidate Sean Lien’s (連勝文) visit to the 228 Memorial Park in Taipei on Friday upset some people, as he observed a historical event — Retrocession Day — while paying no mind to the victims of the 228 Massacre commemorated at the park.
On the anniversary of Japan’s handover of Taiwan to the Republic of China (ROC), when then-chief executive of the ROC forces Chen Yi (陳儀) accepted Japan’s surrender in Taipei on behalf the Allies in World War II in 1945, proclaimed as Taiwan Retrocession Day the next year, Lien paid his respects to four historical figures he regarded as great contributors to the nation. He laid flowers at their bronze busts in the park, including that of Lien Heng (連橫), a historian, author of A General History of Taiwan and his great-grandfather.
As Sean Lien left and was asked why he did not visit the 228 Memorial Monument, which is also in the park, he said it was not on his planned schedule, while his campaign office later said that Lien would pay homage to victims of the 228 Incident some other time.
The 228 Incident refers to the brutal military crackdown that began on Feb. 27, 1947, following civil protests that were the culmination of public indignation sparked by the repressive and corrupt KMT regime since the ROC forces took control over the nation, and led to a huge death toll and the breakup of families.
Either unintentionally or purposely, paying a visit to the 228 Memorial Park in commemoration of Retrocession Day without stopping at the 228 Memorial Monument to remember the 228 Incident was unkind to the victims and their families. However, it could be a carefully calculated electoral strategy to win back undecided voters in the pan-blue KMT camp.
Previous election results have shown that Taipei voters favor the KMT by a 55-45 ratio, if not a 60-40 ratio, making victory difficult for a pan-green candidate in a mayoral election if it is not a three-way race, such as in 1994, when former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) won thanks to a split KMT.
With little more than a month until the election, several public polls have shown that independent mayoral candidate Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) has been leading Lien by double digits in electoral support, attributed to a large portion of pan-blue supporters who have not yet decided for whom to vote and could end up defecting to Ko or choosing not to vote on Nov. 29.
Retrocession Day was a good opportunity for Lien to call for unity in the pro-China ranks. By paying tribute to the four historical figures to highlight the historical links between Taiwan and China, Lien sent the message that furthering ties is something voters can expect from him if he is elected. His snub of the 228 Incident during the visit may have been calculated to accentuate this message.
In the same vein as his recent appeal to military personnel, civil servants and teachers — traditional pan-blue voters — that they will see their preferential benefits slashed if Ko wins the election, and his attempt to characterize Ko as a diehard supporter of Chen, Lien has spun an ideologically partisan message by scheduling the visit to the 228 Memorial Park.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers