Taiwan's DPP Part II: The Opposition Develops and Becomes a Party
Thursday September 29, by Jerome F. Keating Ph.D.
When World War II ended, the Taiwanese found themselves divided on where their future lay. Some wanted the right to choose their own destiny, a right that would be granted to all peoples as part of the United Nations Charter. Others rejoiced that they would join the Republic of China (ROC) and participate with their Chinese brothers in a government "of the people, by the people, and for the people" as Sun Yat-sen had preached. Unfortunately this illusory hope would be quickly dispelled by the Kuomintang’s (KMT) rapacious treatment of the island that led up to the explosion of February 28, 1947. The Taiwanese quickly discovered the meaning of "lip service" and "hypocrisy" as regards Sun Yat-sen's ideal.
To further complicate matters, the United States, leader of the Allied Forces in Asia, took an ambiguous position on Taiwan. As a result, Taiwan’s status would remain unresolved even six years later when the Treaty of San Francisco would be drawn up. Written up and signed by 48 countries in 1951, the treaty went into effect the following year. However, the treaty did not spell out the Allies intent on Taiwan. Marking the official end of World War II, the treaty gave closure in many areas but in areas like Taiwan, it was vague.
By the treaty, Japan surrendered the island of Taiwan but the treaty did not state to whom. Taiwan was only to be "given up." Whether the United States lacked a long range plan on this or whether it preferred that the treaty be vague is arguable. (Note #1)
In the seven years between 1945 and 1952 and on, however, the KMT would begin its use of white terror to solidify its grip on Taiwan. Thus, two distinct groups of opposition arose, opposition overseas and that on the island.
Overseas opposition
Overseas opposition was made up of Taiwanese who wished for independence. Opposed to the KMT takeover, they had fled to nearby Hong Kong and Japan to avoid imprisonment. There they were close enough to maintain contact with Taiwan.
One of this group, Riao Yuen-yi, organized the “Taiwan Re-Liberation Alliance?in Hong Kong. Its purpose was to petition the United Nations that Taiwan should be allowed to vote on independence. Riao also organized a political party, the “Taiwan Democratic Independence Party?in Kyoto in 1950. Its hope was to establish a temporary government for a Republic of Taiwan in Japan. However, in 1965 with several of his relatives held hostage by the KMT and his goal not in sight, Riao eventually surrendered to the KMT.
Another group under the leadership of Su Beng advocated violent resistance and sent over guerilla bands from Japan to blow up bridges and attack KMT police and media stations.
In the meantime, however, there were innumerable others who took up the cause in other ways. Wang Yu-de and the “Taiwan Youth Cooperation?organized a second Taiwan Independence movement in Tokyo. In the 1960’s, the number of Taiwanese pursuing advanced degrees in the United States had also began to organize. By 1970 Taiwanese advocates in Japan, the United States and around the world, established World United Formosans for Independence (WUFI) with international branches. A WUFI advocate would make an assassination attempt on Chiang Ching-kuo while he was visiting New York in that same year. This organization still exists today but has expanded its goals and methods in promoting Taiwan as a Republic.
Other organizations sprang up. The following are some along with their purposes: The Taiwanese Canadian Association (TCA--1963); the Taiwanese Human Rights Association of Canada (THRAC--1971) sought global justice on Taiwan issues; the Taiwanese Association of America (TAA--1971) promoted the appreciation of culture; the Formosan Association for Human Rights (FAHR--1976) focused on political prisoners; the Taiwanese Christian Church Council of North America (TCCCNA--1976) organized the Christian churches.
After the pivotal Kaohsiung Incident (Dec. 1979), many other organizations formed to support the right to self-determination in Taiwan as well as the livelihood of Taiwanese overseas. The North American Taiwanese Professor’s Association (NATPA--1980) promoted scientific and professional knowledge among Taiwanese and Taiwan’s cause; the Formosan Association for Public Affairs (FAPA--1982) promoted Taiwan’s safety and security in the international community; the Taiwanese Collegians (TC--1983) was the student organization; the Taiwanese Foundation of Ottawa (TFO--1983) voiced Taiwanese concerns in Canada’s capital; North American Taiwanese Medical Association (NATMA?984) was for Taiwanese in the medical field; the North American Taiwanese Women’s Association (NATWA--1988) promoted gender equality; the Center for Taiwan’s International Relations (CTIR--1988) promoted research and other projects; the Taiwanese American Citizen’s League (TACL--1989) promoted identity building and American heritage etc.
The above list is by no means all-inclusive. Many Taiwanese opposition groups developed around the world, but this list focuses primarily on Taiwanese groups in North America. It is there that the opposition would wield the most influence on the United States, the main supporter of KMT rule in Taiwan.
More organizations were founded in the eighties and into the nineties. Some were business specific, some were for university students; some were for young professionals after university; and others were in support of Taiwanese culture and ethnic groups. These groups became part of the Taiwanese opposition movement overseas; they promoted Taiwan’s sense of its own culture and heritage; they petitioned in support of human rights abuses in Taiwan; and they supported the cause of democracy in Taiwan both financially and by advocacy.
By supporting the cause of democracy, these organizations directly and indirectly fostered the formation of an opposition party (hence the DPP) to counter the one-party state of the KMT. Such groups had the freedom to organize. The members had advanced degrees and professional careers and so could not as easily be influenced or intimidated by the KMT. WUFI because of its focus on independence guarded most against KMT infiltration.
Opposition on Taiwan
On Taiwan, after the KMT had suppressed the 2/28 uprising and after it had taken almost everything of value to support its losing cause on the mainland, it still found itself in a difficult situation. In 1949, the KMT had been forced to retreat to the island with its tail between its legs. Frustrated with this turn of events, the KMT would take its frustrations out on the people of Taiwan.
Without weapons or power, many Taiwanese had little options but to choose the path of least resistance. This meant keeping your mouth shut in public, giving up politics as a career and trying to find a simple way to earn a living. Others however still believed they had a right to voice their desires for a democracy. By 1950 the Green Island Prison camp had been completed and it quickly filled up with political prisoners.
Protest at this stage was more individual or family based; organizations were forbidden; even gatherings of five to ten people would be suspect. Add to this the fact that the media was controlled by the KMT. Still however, people found ways to speak out as individuals.
The previous generation of intelligentsia had been killed off, imprisoned or driven overseas at the time of er-er-ba (1947). By the sixties a new generation of intelligentsia and leaders was coming of age. One example would be Peng Ming-min. Born in Taiwan in 1923 when it was a Japanese Colony; he studied in Japan during the war and almost lost his life there during an Allied bombing raid. After the war he completed his bachelor’s degree at National Taiwan University. He then went on and completed a Masters in Law at McGill University, Canada and a doctoral degree in the same field at the University of Paris by 1954.
Peng definitely had a bright future ahead of him. Recognized by the KMT, and voted one of the ten outstanding young men of Taiwan, he became a respected professor and Chairman of the Political Science Department at National Taiwan University. He was selected as an advisor to the Republic of China delegation to the United Nations and would be personally thanked for his efforts by Chiang Kai-shek. Peng’s experiences outside Taiwan and in the field of international law however made him conscious of democracy and the rights of man and the true situation in Taiwan. (cf. note #2)
With two friends, Peng wrote a statement he titled, the "Declaration of Formosan Self-salvation;" it would be later titled the "Declaration of Independence of the Formosan People." The statement both challenged the "hoax" perpetuated by the KMT that it was the "true government of China" and that it was only a matter of time before it would go back to China to reclaim that right. It also exposed how this fable was being used by the same KMT to perpetuate its one party rule and subvert the Constitutional democracy.
The ideas never reached their intended audience; the three “conspirators?soon found that all print shops were under strict surveillance for “subversive?ideas. They were caught, imprisoned, and tried for treason. Peng was imprisoned for 14 months and then put under house arrest for the rest of his life. Five years later he would make a dramatic escape overseas from the island (1970). In 1996 he would be the DPP’s candidate against Lee Teng-hui for presidency of the ROC in the island’s first ever nation wide free elections.
Peng Ming-min is just one example. Opposition on the island, however, came not only from the tangwai (those outside the KMT party); voices were also heard from within. Lei Chen ran afoul of Chiang Kai-shek’s regime because he published the Free China biweekly and urged democratic reform within the KMT. Lei would be sentenced to ten years in prison (1960) for his efforts at reform. More telling is the fact that Lei’s prison Memoirs and thoughts on democracy would be destroyed by the KMT government in 1988. That this was done at such a late date points to continuing KMT efforts to hide the truth of the past.
Numerous individual advocates opposed the KMT’s one-party control. The prominent Kuo Yu Hsin was one who continuously spoke out as a member of the Taiwan Provincial Assembly 1945-75; the same went for others on down to the man in the street. The fact that somewhere between twenty to thirty thousand political prisoners were sent to the Green Island prisons illustrates a growing opposition but more perhaps the paranoia of the KMT in reacting to any hint or desire for democracy.
Opposition developed in the Christian community as well; this community by its nature should be for justice and the common man, and the Taiwan Presbyterian Church was one of the leading proponents. In 1972, its leaders proclaimed the right of people for self-determination. Because of the church’s status as a religious group, church members always had a right to gather. Though under heavy surveillance and with several church members jailed, the group maintained its activist role in the cause of human rights and freedom. With a smattering of foreign ministers, the church was a harbinger of the growing involvement of foreigners in support of the cause of Taiwan.
During this time, the KMT claimed it was instituting democratic reform but this was only in lower level positions that could not affect national policy or KMT control of resources. Also, a simple look at logistics and a basic knowledge of what it takes to run a campaign reveal how the odds were stacked against any non-KMT opposition candidates.
First, no other parties were allowed under this one party domination—all others had to run as independents with no support base. Second, the KMT controlled the media, the military, and the police and could easily trump up charges against anyone who was too critical of their rule. Third, KMT candidates could count on the KMT war chests of state-controlled resources to finance their campaigns and/or to bribe officials or opponents. Independents had to have their own or family/clan money.
Coalescence
Nevertheless, in the late seventies, these various opposition groups began to come together. With a common cause and a sense of strength in unity, the overseas opposition groups, the local opposition, church opposition and even involvement of international groups like Amnesty International and concerned foreigners began to actively coordinate their efforts.
Key developments began with the Chungli Incident in 1977. Hsu Hsin-liang had broken ranks with KMT tradition and run as an independent candidate for the Taoyuan County Magistrate. He won, but concern that the KMT was trying to stuff the ballot box against him caused supporters to surround the polling place in protest and ensure his victory. A minor riot followed and the KMT allowed Hsu’s victory. The opposition felt a sense of vindication.
Then by late December 1978 there were to be national elections open to all in Taiwan. Taiwan had already lost its seat in the United Nations seven years earlier in 1971; if this were not bad enough, on December 16, 1978, the United States announced it would formally recognize the People’s Republic of China (PRC). With loss of its UN seat, and the impending loss of US backing, to suffer any loss in national elections would shatter any claim to legitimacy of the KMT government.
The KMT quickly cancelled the December elections. They used the supposed threat of an imminent communist attack as the reason, but their real fear was that of losing key positions in a democratic election. The opposition had been doing increasingly well in local elections; now they finally had a chance to vote nationally.
In August 1979, the opposition began publishing the radical magazine Melidao (Formosa or beautiful island) and a more moderate magazine The Eighties. The Melidao was highly critical of the KMT and set up offices around the island. KMT raids on some of the offices illustrated the lack of free press and free expression but did not dampen the opposition’s purpose.
The opposition grew bolder, pushing for democracy and challenging the legitimacy of the KMT’s one-party state. In desperation the KMT began to circle the wagons to figure a way to stop this challenge. To justify their continued imposition of martial law (30 years) in an allegedly democratic country, the KMT had to prove that the opposition was a veiled communist threat and a danger to society. The occasion chosen for this proof would be a Human Rights Rally planned for Kaohsiung on Dec. 10, 1979.
The Garrison Command laid out a plan where plain-clothes men would infiltrate and mingle with the rally crowd and cause a public disturbance and thus invite the arrest of all leaders. Police and military would surround the site so that none could escape. Initially the plan seemed to work well. The majority of the leaders were caught. Trials were set.
For the KMT to establish a communist plot, the trials had to be public. However, this was not 1947. While the Government Information Office under James Soong controlled the local media and painted the opposition as traitors the foreign press had for some time been observing the true side of the KMT and could make their own judgments. Further, numerous members of the foreign community were aware and were willing to smuggle information out to Hong Kong and Japan.
The arrests created three groups of prisoners. The "Kaohsiung Eight"who were considered the key organizers. They were tried in a military court and given the stiffest sentences. The "Kaohsiung 33," who attended the rally, would be tried in a civil court and given lesser sentences. And finally there were ten people associated with the Presbyterian Church who had helped Shih Ming-the one of the Kaohsiung 8 to temporarily avoid capture. They received lesser sentences.
In the trials, the defendants put forth their grievances and their pursuit for democracy while their lawyers showed the weakness of the KMT case. All were found guilty and imprisoned but few outside viewers were convinced of any justification for continued martial law and control.
The formation of the DPP would still be six years away, but the relationship of the Kaohsiung Incident to the present DPP leadership is evident in the fact that their current President Chen Shui-bian was a lawyer in the trials and Vice-President Annette Lu was one of the Kaohsiung 8. Further, all chairmen of the DPP were involved.
- Chiang Peng-chian (1986-87). Lawyer for Lin Yi-hsiung of the Kaohsiung 8.
- Yao Chia-wen (1987-88).One of the Kaohsiung 8.
- Huang Shin-cheih (1988-91). One of the Kaohsiung 8.
- Hsu Hsin-liang (1991-94). A core contributor of Melidao, he had fled Taiwan.
- Shih Ming-teh (1994-96) One of the Kaohsiung 8.
- Hsu Hsin-liang (1996-98). Cf. #4
- Lin Yi-hsiung (1998-2000) One of the Kaohsiung 8.
- Frank Hsieh (2000-2002). Lawyer for Yao Chia-wen of the Kaohsiung 8(cf. #2).
- Chen Shui-bian (2002-05) Lawyer of Huang Shin-chieh (cf. #3).
- Su Tseng-chang (2005-) Lawyer of Yao Chia-wen (cf. #2).
Times had changed since February 28, 1947. Nevertheless the die-hard element of the KMT was bent on venting its anger at any challenge to their authority and tried to intimidate the opposition using past ruthless tactics. A string of violent murders followed in the early eighties.
The two twin daughters and mother of Lin Yi-hsiung, one of the Kaohsiung Eight, were brutally murdered in February 1980. This was while Lin was in jail and being tortured before trial. His home at this time was under constant surveillance by the government authorities. In July 1981, Carnegie Mellon professor, democracy activist and KMT critic, Chen Wen-cheng, was murdered on a return trip to Taiwan. He had been interrogated by police and later found dead. The Garrison Command was implicated in this murder. In 1984, Henry Liu was murdered in the United States because he had written an un-authorized biography Chiang Ching-kuo.
At the same time, the other more reasonable side of the KMT hoped to use the carrot approach. In 1984, Chiang Ching-kuo appointed Lee Teng-hui, a native born Taiwanese as his Vice President in an effort to show localization. He later approved discussions with the opposition tangwai.
All of these happenings and many more provide the developing backdrop for the opposition gathering in the Grand Hotel on September 28, 1986. The opposition was selecting candidates for the up-coming election in a room registered under the Rotary Club. Political gatherings were still viewed as subversive. Chu Kao-cheng put forth the motion that they form a party to include all the candidates though it was still illegal. The reasoning was that "if we are going to be hung for a sheep, we might as well be hung for a cow." There was also an element that wanted to form a party on Taiwan before one was formed overseas. The motion passed and the DPP was born.
In response, there were not many options left to the KMT. The arrests and trials of the Kaohsiung Incident had not brought their cause any desired justification or sympathy. Chiang Ching-kuo had already approved negotiations with the opposition in May of that year. To arrest a series of candidates in a democratic election simply because they wanted to break the stranglehold of a one-party state would also not bring world opinion to the KMT’s side. Thus the formation of the DPP, though technically illegal, was tolerated. In 1987, martial law would be lifted. In early 1988, Chiang Ching-kuo would pass away and Lee Teng-hui would become president opening a whole new chapter in Taiwan history.
For the DPP, it had been a long, hard struggle of protests, imprisonments, torture, and tears. It was by no means over; only a different phase was being entered. Part I (August 18th entry) showed the changing face of opposition. Part III will treat how the DPP became the majority party and the new issues that would face Taiwanese voters.
For Taiwan, as one looks back over the multitudes of arrests, political prisoners, torturing, and deaths, one can only wonder that if Chiang Kai-shek (d.1975) and the KMT had put even half as much effort into suppressing corruption, graft, and private gain within their party as they did in suppressing democracy; the history of the island would have been so much different.
___________________
Note #1: This is an area that needs further scholarship. In 1950 before the Korean War, the United States was willing to cast Chiang Kai-shek and his regime to the winds because of its corruption. The PRC and USSR sensed this. Yet after the PRC’s intervention in Korea, the USA placed the Seventh Fleet in the Taiwan Strait, it protected Chiang, but in the upcoming Treaty of San Francisco, it still did not cede the island to him in the treaty.
Note #2: The best record of Peng Ming-min’s ideological development is in his autobiography, A Taste of Freedom