Despite repeated promises from President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) that the government will continue to do everything possible to compensate the families of 228 Incident victims, the majority of them have reacted with skepticism. Perhaps the president should realize that what his administration is lacking is sincerity.
Ma bows, laments, admits that what the government has done is far from enough, yet year after year, the victims’ families slam the government’s efforts to address their grievances.
If Ma is confused as to why his efforts have not been worthwhile, the answer is simple: Everyone understands that all the hot air is simply part of a political show.
Despite making a show of admitting the mistakes of its past, the government remains reluctant to tell the public who was responsible for the slaughter. We still do not know the names of the military officers or government officials who ordered the massacre — which included the killing and kidnapping of negotiators chosen to represent the public to talk with government officials.
Most importantly, the head of the government at the time is still officially considered a “great man” by the government, and by the president.
Most of the victims’ families — as well as historians specializing in the field — would agree that Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) should be held responsible for the massacre, as well as for the decades-long White Terror era that saw the execution and imprisonment of thousands of political dissidents. However, Ma refuses to hold him responsible.
Whenever he speaks about Chiang’s role in the 228 Massacre and the White Terror era, Ma says that, though Chiang did some evil things, he still “made more contributions to Taiwan than mistakes,” and each year, on the anniversary of Chiang’s death, Ma makes an official visit to his tomb to pay respect.
It is unimaginable that any national leader of a democracy would so explicitly show their admiration to a deceased dictator. Try to think how the Germans or people around the world would react if a German chancellor decided to pay respect to Nazi leader Adolf Hitler and say that he has “made more contributions than mistakes?”
What would people think if a German chancellor attended a Holocaust memorial service, and apologized to victims and their families while still showing admiration for Hitler?
Moreover, Chiang’s tomb is maintained by government funds, and his statues can be found across the nation. Chiang’s portrait is still on the nation’s coins and banknotes and a large memorial hall surrounded by gardens built in his name still stands in the middle of the nation’s capital. There is no sign that the government has truly reflected and sincerely admitted to the mistakes of the past.
Other than providing monetary compensation to victims’ families, the government still has a long way to go before there can be true reconciliation over the tragedy.
The people of Taiwan deserve to know what really happened during the 228 Incident and the names of the military and civilian officials responsible for the massacre must be made known. The worship of Chiang must stop, and, while recognizing victims who were wrongfully killed or jailed, those who bravely took up arms to fight against the dictatorship of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) at the time should be honored as heroes.
Only when these steps are followed through can the government say that it has put its full effort into dealing with the 228 Incident, and that there might be a possibility for true reconciliation.
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
A Pale View of Hills, a movie released last year, follows the story of a Japanese woman from Nagasaki who moved to Britain in the 1950s with her British husband and daughter from a previous marriage. The daughter was born at a time when memories of the US atomic bombing of Nagasaki during World War II and anxiety over the effects of nuclear radiation still haunted the community. It is a reflection on the legacy of the local and national trauma of the bombing that ended the period of Japanese militarism. A central theme of the movie is the need, at
RSS