Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Central Policy Committee director Alex Tsai’s (蔡正元) praise of Chiang Kai-shek as the “paramount warrior safeguarding Taiwan” is an attempt to boost party identity as the KMT teeters on the edge of a cliff, in defiance of historical facts.
Wednesday was the 42nd anniversary of Chiang Kai-shek’s death and Tsai used the day to plug “Chiang as a paramount warrior,” just as he did in February on the 70th anniversary of the 228 Massacre when he denied that Chiang Kai-shek was the “murderer responsible for the 228 Incident,” as many people believe.
To back up his defense of Chiang Kai-shek regarding the massacre, Tsai cited a telegram from Chiang Kai-shek asking then-Taiwan governor and commander of the Taiwan Garrison Command Chen Yi (陳儀) to “strictly prohibit military and political officials from taking revenge.”
In 2006, then-KMT lawmaker John Chiang (蔣孝嚴), Chiang Kai-shek’s grandson, cited that telegram when he sued three academics who worked on a report that labeled Chiang Kai-shek the “culprit” behind the 228 Massacre. The case was later closed without prosecution.
Academia Sinica associate research fellow Chen Yi-shen (陳儀深) later said that the telegram had been a response to reports Chiang Kai-shek received about rampant arbitrary arrests.
The telegram did not seem to have been followed by those on the ground in Taiwan as “revenge” certainly continued with the “appeasement and clearing-up” that began in late March 1947 to ferret out “bad people.”
Chen Yi, despite calls for his immediate removal from office, kept his job for a few more months until Wei Dao-ming (魏道明) was appointed the first Taiwan provincial governor, to signal a change from military-oriented to bureaucracy-based rule, in May 1947.
Chen remained a prominent KMT figure, becoming chairman of China’s Zhejiang Province, until he reportedly tried to negotiate with the CCP in January 1949. Chiang Kai-shek had him arrested for treason and he was returned to Taiwan, where he was executed in June 1950.
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is more honest in saying that Chiang Kai-shek was undoubtedly liable for the massacre.
As academic Huang Cheng-yi (黃丞儀) said, Chiang Kai-shek’s personal and legal responsibility could be debated, but it is hard to question his political accountability considering his supreme position as the chairman of the KMT.
In another absurd claim, Tsai said that Chiang Kai-shek “gave up the dream of launching a ‘mainland counteroffensive’ after the second Taiwan Strait crisis in 1958 in order to safeguard Taiwan.”
Tsai said Chiang Kai-shek issued a joint communique with the US publicly renouncing the use of force “to return to the mainland.”
However, historian Lin Hsiao-ting (林孝庭) found documents showing that Chiang Kai-shek had come within a hair’s breadth of launching an attack against China in 1962, but the plan was smothered by Washington.
It is preposterous for anyone to claim that Chiang Kai-shek or the KMT had abandoned the idea of a counteroffensive as early as 1958 when it was not until 1991, when then-president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) ended the Temporary Provisions Effective During the Period of Communist Rebellion (動員戡亂時期臨時條款) decree, thereby ending 43 years of emergency rule.
It might be argued that in its latter days, the KMT authoritarian regime came to realize that it was unrealistic to have a “counteroffensive,” but it nevertheless continued to use the banner for its political interests, which included both US aid and its iron-clad grip on political power.
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
On today’s page, Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St Andrew’s University in Osaka, questions the viability and advisability of the government’s proposed “T-Dome” missile defense system. Matsumura writes that Taiwan’s military budget would be better allocated elsewhere, and cautions against the temptation to allow politics to trump strategic sense. What he does not do is question whether Taiwan needs to increase its defense capabilities. “Given the accelerating pace of Beijing’s military buildup and political coercion ... [Taiwan] cannot afford inaction,” he writes. A rational, robust debate over the specifics, not the scale or the necessity,
RSS