In my latest trip to Taipei earlier this month, I heard a chilling phrase that I had not heard for many years.
While hearing it was distasteful, it was not unexpected; I have also been hearing it in Washington for the last two months. The phrase is “White Terror.”
For people here, the term raises memories of that dark period in Taiwan’s post-World War II history when occupying Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) military forces killed tens of thousands of Taiwanese and persecuted and imprisoned countless more.
People who remember that period began using it again after the KMT government imprisoned — without charge — more than a half dozen Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) politicians and former officials on the eve of Chinese cross-strait negotiator Chen Yunlin’s (陳雲林) visit, and then let loose thousands of police on protesters opposing that visit.
For me, it awoke memories of my own time in Taiwan as a student in the Stanford Center at National Taiwan University (NTU) 40 years ago. While my trouble, as a visiting American, was minor compared with the thousands persecuted at the time, it does illustrate some parallels with the present time in the wake of the KMT walk-away electoral victories earlier this year.
I would not bring up the topic save for a frightening and disheartening development that I have heard about in recent years: that the young people of Taiwan do not know about the evils of the White Terror, also known as Martial Law. The school history curricula and the textbooks under a half-century of KMT rule have, I am told, erased the existence of that period for Taiwan’s younger generation.
Now, in the 21st century, the horrors of that period must be resurrected as a staple of schoolhouse education if the country of Taiwan is ever to come to terms with its sordid, late 20th century experiences.
In the 1969-70 year in which I was at NTU, I got used to the mail that came without envelopes, or with sections scissored out by censors. This was why, when I left, I dared not write letters to friends and acquaintances in Taiwan. I knew that my letters might make them targets, and they could lose their jobs, be sent to Green Island in the middle of the night, or worse.
That was probably because I attracted the KMT regime’s attention, having socialized with families of Taiwan independence pioneers, leading an unauthorized anti-war demonstration and later writing stories for Hong Kong’s Far Eastern Economic Review that left KMT leaders reeling.
Those stories led to the most worrisome and egregious incident that occurred after I left Taiwan for Hong Kong.
One day, a Stanford Center student visited me at the Review offices saying that a Stanford teacher had been whisked away in the middle of the night and was feared to have been incarcerated on Green Island without charge.
He was, according to the student, suspected of feeding me the information on which I based my stories. There was no proof, no questions asked, no justice to be had. Just the suspicion and the prospect of the horrors of Green Island imprisonment.
In fact, he had been feeding me information, but only for a story about labor conditions in Taiwan, which ironically I never wrote. An investigator for the dreaded Garrison Command found our names in a guestbook we signed while visiting a textile factory, and arrested him that night.
Through a concerted effort in Taipei and Washington, the students managed to have him released. He became, in effect, a ward of the American students, who alerted their successors every year to find out where he was if he failed to show up at class.
If that is what things were like for Americans and their acquaintances, imagine what it was like for the brave, unprotected Taiwanese who risked their lives and future fighting for freedom and justice against the KMT jackboots.
Taiwan’s youngsters should never be allowed to be brainwashed or denied the right and freedom to know this history in its full dimension.
If recent events in Taiwan prove anything, it is that it is not inconceivable that features of those days could return at any time.
Charles Snyder is the former Washington correspondent for the Taipei Times.
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls. That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
RSS