The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is indeed full of “geniuses.”
One of them read Chiang Kai-shek’s (蔣介石) diaries and concluded that Japan’s defeat in World War II was not because of the atomic bomb, but rather the resistance of the Republic of China (ROC). Another of these KMT geniuses said that transitional justice only concerns a nation that has lost a war and that since the ROC belonged to the winners’ camp, there is no need for any transitional justice.
Many people have gone to Stanford University to study Chiang’s diaries, but none had invalidated the conclusion that it was the atomic bomb that forced Japan to surrender.
By the end of World War II, half of China was already in the hands of the Japanese, who did not surrender until two atomic bombs were dropped on their native soil and Chiang was appointed by the Allies to accept Japan’s surrender in China.
It is quite obvious that only those geniuses who are completely oblivious to the facts would deny the power of atomic bombs.
GENIUS AWARD
Arguing that there is no need for transitional justice in a nation that has won a war is another surefire way to win a genius award.
It is indisputable that both the US and the ROC were in the winning camp after World War II. Despite that, both nations have gone through processes of transitional justice.
During World War II, the US military was segregated. After the war, racial equality was sought and the civil rights movement developed quickly.
After the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, 110,000 Japanese-Americans were put in internment camps, and it was only after several years of hard work that the US government made official apologies and offered reparations to survivors and their descendants.
As Chiang and his “victorious nation” rejected reform, Mao Zedong (毛澤東) and his gang started a revolution and kicked Chiang and his gang out of China, which served transitional justice for China.
The Chiang family fled to Taiwan, where they instituted a party-state system, appropriated private and Japanese assets, orchestrated the 228 Massacre and began the White Terror era, which resulted in even more injustice and is the reason for renewed calls for transitional justice.
LENINIST PARTIES
When people talk about transitional justice, they are primarily talking about the violent rule of autocratic Leninist-style parties, which deprived people of their liberty and human rights and appropriated private assets. That is what transitional justice is about in many nations in former eastern Europe.
There are two Chinese Leninist political parties. One is in Taiwan, where it is currently facing transitional justice, and the other is in China; it will face an even harsher transitional justice when the time comes.
The Chinese Communist Party’s tyranny and its “Three Anti-” and “Five Anti-” campaigns, labor reform camps and the 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre incurred immeasurable losses to people’s lives and property, as well as causing mental suffering.
The family members of KMT members who fled to Taiwan and were put in the “five black categories” were bitterly persecuted. It is incomprehensible that the present-day KMT feels no shame as it sucks up to the Communists.
Good luck, Chinese people. You are in even greater need of transitional justice.
James Wang is a media commentator.
Translated by Ethan Zhan
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing