Thursday last week marked the anniversary of Chiang Kai-shek’s (蔣介石) death. Once again, the public witnessed his disciples and followers pledging their eternal loyalty to their great leader, with homages at Chiang’s mausoleum, memorials and forums.
Since the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is also electing its chairperson this year, candidates have been verbally attacking each other, putting the internecine party struggles on public display.
A KMT official unhappy with statements by some party members and former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) that Chiang shares responsibility for the 228 Incident said that party members, when asked about Chiang’s role, should issue this standard response: “Chiang Kai-shek was not the murderer behind the 228 Incident; he was the first among warriors protecting Taiwan.”
This “standard response” does not conform to facts and makes no sense, and issuing such a statement after Taiwan had just marked the 70th anniversary of the 228 Incident makes it clear that the KMT — after having lost its hold on the government and the legislature — continues to stand opposed to Taiwan and Taiwanese, and to stubbornly stay on its road to nowhere.
Historically, Chiang was responsible for a large number of deaths in China, and he is one of the 20th century’s four biggest mass murderers, alongside Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong (毛澤東) and Adolf Hitler. He also brought serious harm to Taiwanese lives and property. From the 228 Incident and the White Terror era to the decades of martial law, innumerable Taiwanese suffered from his cruelty. Calling him a butcher, dictator and murderer is very appropriate.
With regards to the 228 Incident, official files that have been made public show that it was Chiang who ordered the dispatch of troops to Taiwan to suppress Taiwanese demands for reform, eliminate the local elite and indiscriminately kill innocent people, resulting in mass murder.
Chiang did not kill these people with his own hands, but it was done by Chen Yi (陳儀), who had been appointed by Chiang and who controlled the military government in Taiwan at the time. Moreover, Chiang agreed with Chen’s request for troops to suppress the public and ordered Chen to dispose of the matter expediently. He sanctioned the killings and violence carried out by Chen, Peng Meng-chi (彭孟緝) and other military leaders.
Saying that Chiang bears the main responsibility for the 228 Massacre is a fair assessment.
The KMT has claimed that Chiang protected Taiwan. After World War II ended, Chiang accepted the Japanese forces’ surrender in Taiwan on the orders of Allied Forces commander-in-chief general Douglas MacArthur. However, he then occupied Taiwan and included it in Chinese territory. In doing so, he completely ignored the will of Taiwanese and deprived them of their right to choose to establish their own nation after the war, as countries in the region established their independence one after another.
Even worse, Chiang brought with him the turmoil and disaster of the Chinese Civil War, which caused hyperinflation and brought economic, social and political chaos to Taiwan. If it had not been for the outbreak of the Korean War, which convinced the US to change its position and support Chiang because of its opposition to communism, Taiwan would not have been able to turn the tide and overcome the crisis.
Chiang ruled Taiwan as a despot and based on a “Greater China” attitude, and deceived everyone — including himself — that China would be reconquered. The result is that Taiwan to this day continues to lack the normal status of a regular nation, while it remains under the shadow of Chinese threat. Chiang was not the protector of Taiwan; he was guilty of bringing disaster to all Taiwanese.
This is precisely why a fair evaluation of Chiang is a necessary part of transitional justice and the democratization of Taiwan. The deification foolishness of the authoritarian era must not be allowed to continue and the remaining fragments of this cult of personality must be swept away.
At about the time of the anniversary of Chiang’s death, some people with ulterior motives reminded us of the social conditions when Chiang was dying. For one month, military personnel, civil servants and public school teachers had to wear mourning badges, all entertainment was banned, media outlets were only allowed to use black and white, and everyone was taught the Chiang memorial song. Paying homage became an expression of loyalty. Everyone had to kneel down during the funeral proceedings and the whole nation behaved as if it had lost its father as “their tears filled with blood.”
In Taiwan 42 years ago, the deification of a dictator was as foolish as what is still going on in North Korea today.
Perhaps KMT leaders want people to continue to act out their “eternal loyalty to the great leader” every year, but as the leadership’s resistance to historical fact and the pursuit of justice makes even a mild statement — such as saying that Chiang shares responsibility for the 228 Incident — unacceptable, it will only reinforce the party’s disconnection from Taiwanese.
Sophistry and chicanery in defense of Chiang are not isolated. Last month, the KMT claimed that assets taken when the Japanese left Taiwan were taken in compensation for losses sustained during the war against Japan in China. When the party “suddenly” found gold bonds worth NT$38.5 billion (US$1.26 billion based on current exchange rates) last month, that was part of this mindset.
In China, the government says that the Chinese Communist Party led the war against Japan and that it was the mainstay of Chinese resistance. It is pretty obvious that these two political parties waving the Chinese flag on each side of the Taiwan Strait are equals when it comes to distorting history and pushing their own view of it.
Chiang’s place in history needs to be properly defined, not erased.
When Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) said that removing references to Chiang is not beneficial to social harmony because what it actually means is “I don’t like you, so I’ll get rid of you,” he is making a big mistake.
Chiang “got rid of” many Taiwanese and the victims were not isolated to a single group, and this has already cemented his infamy. He needs to be taken down from his pedestal and given a fair and just appraisal.
Chiang’s infamy is indelible and cannot be removed, so it is a non-issue.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Within Taiwan’s education system exists a long-standing and deep-rooted culture of falsification. In the past month, a large number of “ghost signatures” — signatures using the names of deceased people — appeared on recall petitions submitted by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) against Democratic Progressive Party legislators Rosalia Wu (吳思瑤) and Wu Pei-yi (吳沛憶). An investigation revealed a high degree of overlap between the deceased signatories and the KMT’s membership roster. It also showed that documents had been forged. However, that culture of cheating and fabrication did not just appear out of thin air — it is linked to the
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
Taiwan People’s Party Legislator-at-large Liu Shu-pin (劉書彬) asked Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) a question on Tuesday last week about President William Lai’s (賴清德) decision in March to officially define the People’s Republic of China (PRC), as governed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), as a foreign hostile force. Liu objected to Lai’s decision on two grounds. First, procedurally, suggesting that Lai did not have the right to unilaterally make that decision, and that Cho should have consulted with the Executive Yuan before he endorsed it. Second, Liu objected over national security concerns, saying that the CCP and Chinese President Xi
China’s partnership with Pakistan has long served as a key instrument in Beijing’s efforts to unsettle India. While official narratives frame the two nations’ alliance as one of economic cooperation and regional stability, the underlying strategy suggests a deliberate attempt to check India’s rise through military, economic and diplomatic maneuvering. China’s growing influence in Pakistan is deeply intertwined with its own global ambitions. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a flagship project of the Belt and Road Initiative, offers China direct access to the Arabian Sea, bypassing potentially vulnerable trade routes. For Pakistan, these investments provide critical infrastructure, yet they also
RSS