Sixtieth Anniversary of the February 28 Incident

Not long after the Nationalist government took over Taiwan in 1947, the Taiwanese, who had high hopes for the "motherland" at the beginning of the restoration period, discovered that traditional Chinese corruption and brutality was worse than that of the previous colonial Japanese government; business collapsed and the people were up in arms.

It was in this tumultuous environment that on February 27 an incident occurred involving an overzealous inspection officer looking for smuggled cigarettes. In error, people were wounded and killed, leading to a huge uproar the next day. At the instigation of agitators the unrest quickly spread to the entire island. The central government sent troops to Taiwan to suppress the movement, retaliating against all those involved, leading to a death toll estimated at 18,400. This was the 228 Incident.

Very few images remain of the chaos and violence of the 228 Incident. This woodblock print, "Inspection of Terror," is the only piece to explicitly depict the events of that day. The artist, a "mainlander" by the name of Huang Jung-tsan, had come to Taiwan to work as an editor-in-chief at a newspaper. Huang was shot and killed in 1952 during the White Terror; since then this piece has passed through several hands, and is currently held by the Museum of Modern Art in Kanagawa, Japan. Both the picture and the artist have truly heartbreaking stories.

Differing interpretations

Before Chiang Ching-kuo announced the lifting of martial law in July 1987, "228" was a taboo subject in Taiwan. Almost no one in the younger generation knew anything about it, although overseas the incident had attracted great attention.

Early on there were primarily two movements outside Taiwan that commemorated the 228 Incident. One was the Taiwanese independence movement, which called on people to "oppose KMT colonialist rule," while the other was the unification movement supported by Beijing, calling on people to "oppose KMT despotism." These two movements, independence and unification, were clearly different. But whether it was called a "revolution" or an "uprising," the 228 Incident was only lightly touched upon in political writings and no one inquired about the personal experience of the survivors and family members of the victims; worse, these people were even labeled plotters and rebels and a whole generation was unable to raise its head. The extent of their psychological wounds could scarcely be really appreciated by outsiders.

The legacy of the 228 Incident was the White Terror that reigned during the 1950s, the horrifying, deadly atmosphere and chilling effect on people speaking out that led to victims, social groups and the academic community keeping silent out of fear. In a situation where it was impossible to have discussion with public testimony and discontent remained bottled up with no place to go, the 228 Incident gradually became an unseen curent renting Taiwan society apart. The "Mainlanders"/"alien regime" were starkly contrasted with "native Taiwanese." The curse of provincial prejudice still hangs over us to this day.

If we take a good look at the nature of "228" we see it was really a spontaneous incident that turned into a major disaster due to Taiwan Governor-General Chen Yi's mishandling of the affair. But afterwards the KMT authorities insisted on blaming communist agitation. And right up to 1989 when it presented the first official report on the 228 Incident in the Legislative Yuan, the government was still primarily blaming the incident on "agitation and exploitation by communist elements" and laid all the responsibility on the "chief plotter who planned and controlled behind the scenes, Communist Party member Hsieh Hsueh-hung."

Ironically, not long after, this official "228" report was mined by Beijing for its own report on the suppression of the Tiananmen Incident. The PRC authorities copied almost the whole text, changing only a few key words. "Agitation and exploitation by communist elements" was altered to "agitation and exploitation by anti-Party elements"; the "chief plotter who planned and controlled behind the scenes" was changed from the Taiwanese communist Hsieh Hsueh-hung to "anti-Party element Fang Lizhi"!

Although we are talking about opposing governments and two different times, the fact that the thinking and ruling approach of different totalitarian regimes didn't have a dime's worth of difference between them is a painful and regretful observation.

Redressing injustice

The normalization of the way the 228 Incident is dealt with in Taiwan began with the people.

In 1987 the Taiwan Association for Human Rights and the Taiwan Presbyterian Church formed the 228 Peace Day Association and launched the movement to redress the injustices that had been done. In that same year a series of public commemorative activities took place throughout Taiwan, that drawing most attention being the 40th anniversary commemoration of "228" held on February 28 in Ilan. That same day was the seventh anniversary of the grisly murder at home in Kaohsiung of the mother and two young daughters of Lin Yi-hsiung, a martyr of the Formosa Incident.

In early 1988 President Chiang Ching-kuo passed away and the vice-president, Lee Teng-hui, succeeded to the position. At his first press conference as president, on February 22, Lee Teng-hui advanced his personal view on the 228 Incident and immediately directed his second daughter, Annie Lee, to the Academica Sinica to learn about the research of Lai Jeh-hang and to listen to recommendations on how the government might handle the situation. From that time forward the taboo on speaking about the 228 Incident was formally lifted for those in political, academic, civil society and even artistic circles. Whether it was legislative inquiries, demonstrations, commemorative gatherings, academic research, memorial tablets... all activities were carried out with enthusiasm and the suppressed resentment of more than 40 years of injustice poured out.

Among these was the showing in 1989 of City of Sadness, directed by Hou Hsiao-hsien and winner of the Golden Lion Award at the 1989 Venice Film Festival. The picture is a direct depiction of the 228 Incident and can be seen as a new milestone in the public's breaking out of the official mold and coming to a new recognition of "228."

During its session of February 27, 1990 the Legislative Yuan dedicated a collective minute of silence to those who had died in the 228 Incident.

This was the first time since the KMT came to power in Taiwan that it had shown any goodwill with regard to "228," symbolically marking it as an historical tragedy for the island. On May 20, 1990 Lee Teng-hui was inaugurated as the 8th-term president of the Republic of China and immediately directed senior presidential advisor Chiu Chuang-huan to form a 228 Task Force to draft a report with policy recommendations for government consideration. The active and positive actions of President Lee initiated the spiritual rehabilitation led by the government associated with the wounds of the 228 Incident.

That same year, "228" was written into the senior high school history textbooks. The Ministry of the Interior revised the Martyrs' Shrines and Memorials Regulations and decided to erect a 228 Peace Commemoration Tablet. The Executive Yuan during Hau Po-tsun's tenure as premier also set up a 228 Task Force, inviting academics and specialists to pull together all relevant information domestically and overseas. In 1992 the 228 Investigation Report was published.

When in 1993 Winston Chang, a third-generation member of the Chiang family and late president of Soochow University, presided over a 228 Requiem, President Lee Teng-hui said on the occasion that a Committee to Erect a 228 Memorial Tablet would be jointly organized by the government and the private sector. On February 28 of that year Premier Hau Po-tsun led all cabinet members in a minute of silence for the victims of "228."

The 228 Memorial Tablet was completed in Taipei New Park in 1995. On behalf of the government, President Lee apologized to the entire nation for the mistakes and brutality used in handling the 228 Incident. This not only redressed the injustice of "228," the government's admission of error and its apology also showed that the values of democracy and human rights cannot be trampled on by the government. The following year Taipei New Park officially became the 228 Memorial Park in commemoration of the incident.

Changing sadness to sympathy

In terms of real compensation, on April 7, 1995 President Lee promulgated the Statute Governing the Handling of and Compensation for the 228 Incident and the Executive Yuan established a fund to handle compensation claims by victims. As of December 2006, the fund had received a total of 2,756 requests for compensation with 2,264 cases being established and over NT$7 billion disbursed from the fund. The actual number of victims and family members receiving compensation totaled 9,420.

On the eve of the 60th anniversary of the 228 Incident, because of the many years of positive action on the part of the government, the significance of "228" to Taiwan has moved gradually from symbolizing sadness and fear to symbolizing sympathy and courage.

Current KMT chairman Ma Ying-jeou added a footnote to the national lowering of the flag to half mast in commemoration of 228 Memorial Day that began last year by calling the victims of the incident "national martyrs." How imposing and weighty is this designation. Our country, beset with problems, almost disintegrated because of "228," and then for 60 years it lurched from side to side until finally a life cycle, a shou was completed. Most of the heroic spirits who were sacrificed in "228" died young, like the artist Chen Cheng-po at age 52, and Lin Mosei (Lin Mao-sheng), former head of the college of liberal arts at Taiwan National University, just 60 and unable to reach his 60th birthday celebration, who tragically but heroically met his death.

In view of Taiwan's people of virtue born under an unlucky star, we, the fortunate and favored ones, have no excuse for temporizing. The 228 Incident was a wake-up call for Taiwanese to face squarely the lessons of the past, and that history must not be repeated. In looking to the ultimate values of democracy and human rights, Taiwanese should embrace them with a deep sense of appreciation and humility."