In her inaugural address on May 20, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) had her work cut out for her. Not only did she have to address the high expectations Taiwanese have for political reform, but she also had to take on the rather grave responsibility of showing the international community how she was going to further Taiwan’s democracy over the course of her presidential term. At this crucial juncture, the issue of how she would bring about transitional justice is going to be a very important test for the government.
Many Taiwanese are immigrants, or descendants of immigrants. It is only natural that the third generation of immigrants acknowledge the land in which they were born and raised as their home. This is also the experience of many other democratic nations.
The first generation would feel nostalgia for the land they left behind. The second generation would likely be influenced by the attachments their parents have for the old nation. However, the third generation is different. They would start to see the place in which they grew up — and in which they, for all intents and purposes, can imagine that they will live out the rest of their lives — as their true home.
This is a process that has come to be known in Taiwan as “natural independence.” It has nothing to do with political ideology and everything to do with whether civil society believes it has a future.
To address this trend, Tsai is the best-equipped president in Taiwan’s democratic history to promote transitional justice. As such, she needs to consider how she will use transitional justice to conflate the values and core ideals of civil society and to avoid causing a second round of damage while trying to further it.
On the issue of transitional justice, two circumstances involving German Chancellor Angela Merkel are worth considering. The first was her response to a claim by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who said in a speech in October last year that during World War II, the Palestinian grand mufti of Jerusalem was the one who originally suggested the genocide of Jewish people to Adolf Hitler.
Merkel corrected Netanyahu the very next day by saying that it was the Germans who should take responsibility for the Holocaust. Merkel’s approach of facing historical facts without hesitation is one of the best guarantees that Germany is a reliable partner in the international community.
The other was Merkel’s policy last summer of allowing large numbers of Syrian refugees into Germany. The policy was necessarily scaled back in the aftermath of a number of unfortunate incidents, which also damaged her standing in the polls, but the failure of the refugee policy is also due, in no small part, to the scars Germany’s experience as the instigator of two world wars has left behind and passed onto later generations like a shadow hanging over them.
According to 2012 statistics, 60 percent of Germans over the age of 65 — about 16.5 million people — were potentially suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. They would easily become excessively anxious over minor things and the emotional instability would often become a negative aspect passed on to the next generation. This psychological tendency of becoming excessively anxious for no apparent reason has meant that Germany is often viewed by other Western nations as being an “angst society.”
Coming back to Taiwan, and the question of transitional justice, people should encourage the perpetrators and their descendants to honestly face up to the past and see how they caused harm to others while seeking to comply with the demands of totalitarian rulers, and also to deal with their long-term reluctance to own up to the mistakes of the past.
The mistakes have, on the one hand, led to the emergence of profound obstacles and feelings of mistrust between themselves and their families and the people around them, and on the other, cast shadows and wrought psychological harm to themselves, without them actually being aware of what has happened.
Taiwanese also need to mitigate in some way the harm wrought to Aborigines, with the revoking of their rights to exist, as well as the considerable pain visited upon the victims of the 228 Massacre and the White Terror era and their relatives. There needs to be some form of political, social and economic redress so that Taiwanese can move beyond the dark period in their history.
It is about more than just patching up the bad blood between different groups within society: It is about leaving behind a particularly pernicious collective historical memory.
With recent concerns in the international community over the increasingly illiberal direction Poland’s ruling Law and Justice Party is taking the nation, people are starting to question how it could be that an authoritarian government could come to power in a nation such as Poland, which has gone through the process of transitional justice.
Many observers of the political situation in central and eastern Europe say that there are many people in Poland who are quite happy to dwell on their nation’s tragic past, with all the foreign invasions it has suffered, while also ignoring their civic duty to lay the foundations of a democratic society. This interpretation is something that perhaps Taiwanese would do well to take note of.
What is done is done. There is nothing people can do to prevent tragedies that have already occurred.
However, how people handle transitional justice and the collective memory of what happened can change the way the events are looked back upon. If mistakes can be corrected or mitigated through profound reflection, people would not be necessarily locked into having a negative memory of them. Transitional justice is one way that this process of healing can happen.
If people are willing to face up to what has happened, there is no reason that this cannot be turned into a historical opportunity. Much has been said about the events, with layer upon layer of stories told from different perspectives and with different objectives: the stories of the perpetrators and of the victims, stories of reflection and of reconciliation.
People would need to unravel the knot of all the stories to reveal some kind of underlying truth at their center, and, hopefully, find some kind of consensus among it all.
It is only when people are willing to collectively acknowledge that each and every person has the right to publicly relate the harm and damage they, or the group to which they belong, however defined, was subjected to at the hands of the authoritarian system or state violence, that they can, together, embark upon the process of facing up to what happened in the past and successfully turn things around.
By openly addressing the historical facts and setting the historical record straight, Taiwanese can live together with mutual respect.
Hua Yih-fen is a professor in the Department of History at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Paul Cooper
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long been expansionist and contemptuous of international law. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the CCP regime has become more despotic, coercive and punitive. As part of its strategy to annex Taiwan, Beijing has sought to erase the island democracy’s international identity by bribing countries to sever diplomatic ties with Taipei. One by one, China has peeled away Taiwan’s remaining diplomatic partners, leaving just 12 countries (mostly small developing states) and the Vatican recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign nation. Taiwan’s formal international space has shrunk dramatically. Yet even as Beijing has scored diplomatic successes, its overreach
In her article in Foreign Affairs, “A Perfect Storm for Taiwan in 2026?,” Yun Sun (孫韻), director of the China program at the Stimson Center in Washington, said that the US has grown indifferent to Taiwan, contending that, since it has long been the fear of US intervention — and the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) inability to prevail against US forces — that has deterred China from using force against Taiwan, this perceived indifference from the US could lead China to conclude that a window of opportunity for a Taiwan invasion has opened this year. Most notably, she observes that
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
Since being re-elected, US President Donald Trump has consistently taken concrete action to counter China and to safeguard the interests of the US and other democratic nations. The attacks on Iran, the earlier capture of deposed of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and efforts to remove Chinese influence from the Panama Canal all demonstrate that, as tensions with Beijing intensify, Washington has adopted a hardline stance aimed at weakening its power. Iran and Venezuela are important allies and major oil suppliers of China, and the US has effectively decapitated both. The US has continuously strengthened its military presence in the Philippines. Japanese Prime
RSS