An article published in the Dec. 12, 1949, edition of the Central Daily News (中央日報) bore a headline with the intimidating phrase: “You Cannot Escape.” The article was about the execution of seven “communist spies,” some say on the basis of forced confessions, at the end of the 713 Penghu Incident.
Those were different times, born of political paranoia shortly after the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) relocated to Taiwan following defeat in China by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The phrase was a warning by the KMT regime to the local populace not to challenge its power or threaten national unity.
The Penghu Incident does not have the notoriety or historical profile of the 228 Incident that occurred two years earlier. However, both are symptomatic of the historical trauma that continues to plague attempts at national unity in Taiwan.
The CCP, too, continues to seek national unity in its own country, but very differently from how the problem is being addressed in Taiwan. While Taiwan is trying to seek unity through transparency, China is trying to eradicate differences to construct a unity of its own liking, through the suppression of history, culture and differences of opinion.
Today’s Opinion page is all about reconciliation with the past. Arthur Chang (張崇廉), a lieutenant colonel in the navy reserve, writes about transitional justice and the need to avoid seeking retribution, even though closure relies on accountability of the protagonist. He believes that the KMT is yet to allow this closure to happen. Political commentator Shen Yan (沈言) in “History points in one direction,” writes about the ethnic, cultural and linguistic complexity of Taiwanese society that occurred as a result of immigration in the post-war chaos, stretching over three generations of the same family: his grandfather heavily influenced by the Japanese colonial period, his father-in-law who spoke in a heavy Shandong accent and had experienced the 713 Penghu Incident as a student, and he himself, who grew up in the democratic era.
Finally, writer Liu Che-ting (劉哲廷) writes about the recent launch of an online resource by the Ministry of Education on transitional justice, and the absurdity of having this resource promoting transitional justice in a country in which a huge expanse of capital city real estate is taken up by the Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall, an “enormous monument to an authoritarian past.” The juxtaposition is absurd, although explicable with an understanding of the historical, national and ethnic complexity of a nation yet to emerge from the contradictions of the post-war period.
Official attempts at transitional justice, coupled with the vibrant debate around it, are testament to the messy but organic process that demonstrates the strengths of the democratic system: a search for unity and understanding with society-wide participation. The criticisms are valid, but that they can be levied at all is proof that expression in a democracy is not limited to a single vote every four years. It is a bottom-up process that embraces historical and ethnic diversity, where the populace is warning the former authoritarian regime that it “cannot escape” its actions.
In China, the CCP is pushing for a manufactured unity. The Chinese National People’s Congress passed the Act on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress on Thursday, which Mainland Affairs Council Deputy Minister Liang Wen-chieh (梁文傑) has said is essentially a law representing Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) vision of governing different ethnic groups in China, “to establish what the CCP perceives as ‘correct’ views on the nation, history, ethnicity, culture, education and religion.”
As Khedroob Thondup, a former member of the Tibetan parliament in exile, wrote in “Legislative unity, erasing difference” (“Minds are not so easily colonized,” page 8, March 13), the law recasts “unity in diversity” as “unity through uniformity” and “reframes diversity as a threat, turning legal protections into instruments of erasure.”
The law also provides a legal basis to prosecute parents who want to instill “detrimental” views in children that would “affect ethnic harmony.”
It is one man, Xi, telling the world’s second-most populous nation how to conceptualize their identity, and not to challenge the party or threaten national unity; it is a warning to any dissenters that “you cannot escape,” that there is nowhere to hide.
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
In an op-ed published in Foreign Affairs on Tuesday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) said that Taiwan should not have to choose between aligning with Beijing or Washington, and advocated for cooperation with Beijing under the so-called “1992 consensus” as a form of “strategic ambiguity.” However, Cheng has either misunderstood the geopolitical reality and chosen appeasement, or is trying to fool an international audience with her doublespeak; nonetheless, it risks sending the wrong message to Taiwan’s democratic allies and partners. Cheng stressed that “Taiwan does not have to choose,” as while Beijing and Washington compete, Taiwan is strongest when
US Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng (何立峰) are expected to meet this month in Paris to prepare for a meeting between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). According to media reports, the two sides would discuss issues such as the potential purchase of Boeing aircraft by China, increasing imports of US soybeans and the latest impacts of Trump’s reciprocal tariffs. However, recent US military action against Iran has added uncertainty to the Trump-Xi summit. Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) called the joint US-Israeli airstrikes and the