Today is a solemn day marking the beginning of a tragic chapter in the nation’s history. Seventy years ago, the 228 Massacre began; it was a violent crackdown spearheaded by the then-Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) authoritarian regime that led to the White Terror era, during which thousands of Taiwanese were arrested, imprisoned and executed.
Many relatives of the massacre victims still do not know the reason for their loved ones’ deaths or the whereabouts of their remains.
While there is no known count of the total number of people killed during the massacre, historians estimate the casualties as being between 20,000 and 30,000.
Given that only about 2,200 compensation claims have been filed under the Act for Handling and Compensation for the 228 Incident (二二八事件賠償及處理條例), the vast disparity in numbers suggests that the truth concerning that dark page in Taiwan’s history has not been entirely uncovered and that the shadow of the massacre and the White Terror era still haunts many Taiwanese.
A more comprehensive understanding of what happened needs to be pursued. While it is painful to recall the injustices, the nation must continue to dig for answers so the whole truth about the bloody crackdown can be unearthed.
Those who argue that people should let bygones be bygones, all the while claiming that those who chase after the matter are motivated by revenge, ought to be reminded that to this day, no culprits — primary or secondary — have been officially held accountable.
For every crime, there are victims and perpetrators; yet in the case of the massacre, they seem to be missing.
Despite efforts by the government to heal the wounds by acknowledging mistakes, apologizing, offering compensation and erecting commemorative monuments, Taiwanese have only heard mention of victims, never who was responsible for this traumatic event.
While people will not forget, they should forgive and move on.
However, it is difficult for friends and relatives of victims to forgive when they do not even know who should be forgiven, as the killers and accomplices were never named.
A report published by a group of academics in 2006 said Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) should be held accountable for the Incident, along with then-Taiwan governor Chen Yi (陳儀) and Kaohsiung Fortress commander Peng Meng-chi (彭孟緝), who were directly responsible for the troops.
In a book released yesterday, Academia Sinica researcher Chen Yi-shen (陳儀深) cited declassified documents which said that Chiang approved Chen Yi’s request for military intervention in the nationwide protests following the Incident and showed support for Chen Yi and Peng in the aftermath.
Even former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) yesterday said that Chiang has responsibility to bear for the Incident and the ensuing White Terror era. While Ma did add that more deliberation is needed “to determine what exactly that responsibility was” and warned against jumping to conclusions, his remarks nonetheless show that there is now a consensus among the pan-green and pan-blue camps that those who bear responsibility need to be uncovered.
As there is no truth, including official identification of the persons primarily responsible for this abominable crime, talk of implementing transitional justice is disingenuous.
On Sunday, 13 new urgent care centers (UCC) officially began operations across the six special municipalities. The purpose of the centers — which are open from 8am to midnight on Sundays and national holidays — is to reduce congestion in hospital emergency rooms, especially during the nine-day Lunar New Year holiday next year. It remains to be seen how effective these centers would be. For one, it is difficult for people to judge for themselves whether their condition warrants visiting a major hospital or a UCC — long-term public education and health promotions are necessary. Second, many emergency departments acknowledge
US President Donald Trump’s seemingly throwaway “Taiwan is Taiwan” statement has been appearing in headlines all over the media. Although it appears to have been made in passing, the comment nevertheless reveals something about Trump’s views and his understanding of Taiwan’s situation. In line with the Taiwan Relations Act, the US and Taiwan enjoy unofficial, but close economic, cultural and national defense ties. They lack official diplomatic relations, but maintain a partnership based on shared democratic values and strategic alignment. Excluding China, Taiwan maintains a level of diplomatic relations, official or otherwise, with many nations worldwide. It can be said that
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) made the astonishing assertion during an interview with Germany’s Deutsche Welle, published on Friday last week, that Russian President Vladimir Putin is not a dictator. She also essentially absolved Putin of blame for initiating the war in Ukraine. Commentators have since listed the reasons that Cheng’s assertion was not only absurd, but bordered on dangerous. Her claim is certainly absurd to the extent that there is no need to discuss the substance of it: It would be far more useful to assess what drove her to make the point and stick so
The central bank has launched a redesign of the New Taiwan dollar banknotes, prompting questions from Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — “Are we not promoting digital payments? Why spend NT$5 billion on a redesign?” Many assume that cash will disappear in the digital age, but they forget that it represents the ultimate trust in the system. Banknotes do not become obsolete, they do not crash, they cannot be frozen and they leave no record of transactions. They remain the cleanest means of exchange in a free society. In a fully digitized world, every purchase, donation and action leaves behind data.
RSS