Yesterday, as I was watching the mess over at the Memorial Formerly Known as CKS Memorial on TV in the school cafeteria, I thought to myself that this was certain to trigger a flood of really bad articles in the foreign media about Taiwan. Already AFP is
ahead of the curve on that one....
Note how the anti-DPP framing begins with the headline:
Taiwan leader defends move to downplay Chiang legacy
Imagine an article written about getting rid of the memorials of Soviet colonialism in Eastern Europe entitled
Polish Leader defends move to downplay Communist legacy. No one would regard "downplaying" the authoritarian past as a move that required a "defense." This is just another demonstration of the double standards that infest the discourse on democratic change in this part of the world -- the world press cheered the removal of statues in Eastern Europe, but it doesn't appear able to present the same forthright position on Taiwan. Just read this BBC article on
a very similar situation in Estonia, which I'll be getting back to.
From the opening frame of the article, it is very clear where the writer's sympathies lie.
Taiwan President Chen Shui-bian Thursday defended a move to take the name of Chiang Kai-shek off a memorial gate, calling the late leader a "dictator" who should not be honoured.
"This is the question of whether we should worship a dictator, an authoritative ruler who had suppressed human rights, as a god or a feudal emperor," said Chen, of the pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), in a letter posted on his website.
Chiang, who died in 1975, is remembered by many as the leader who laid the foundation of Taiwan's economic prosperity and safeguarded the island from Chinese invasion.
He led the Kuomintang (KMT) party, which ruled Taiwan for 51 years until 2000 when it lost power to the DPP.
It's quite blatant here -- the accusation of being a dictator -- which is a historical fact -- is placed on the lips of
the DPP President (by contrast, AFP has no trouble
calling Stalin a dictator. Double standards, anyone?). The reporter then writes the counterargument from the narrator's own perspective, where it carries more weight than it would if it had been placed in the mouth of some KMT spokesperson. Note the soft language as well -- Chiang
safeguarded Taiwan (that was actually the US Navy) and the KMT
ruled Taiwan -- no mention of martial law in association with the KMT, never mind the political killings. The KMT argument repeated here by AFP is the functional equivalent of Russia's claim that its army saved Estonia from Nazism, and omitting mention of the Communist Party's authoritarian rule. Note below that the BBC has no trouble referring to Soviet control of Estonia as "occupation" but the parallel term
martial law is AWOL in the AFP article -- with one telling exception. Because AFP omits key historical facts, no reader can understand what is going on unless they already know.
By contrast, consider the BBC article on Estonia:
The president of Estonia has signed into law a bill allowing the removal of a controversial Soviet war memorial from the centre of the capital Tallinn.
The bronze statue of a Soviet soldier, erected in 1947, is regarded by many as a symbol of Soviet occupation.
However, the large ethnic-Russian population in Estonia see it as a symbol of liberation from the Nazis.
The decision has angered Russia too. The Russian parliament is expected to adopt a statement denouncing the law.
The BBC reports the respective positions, and more importantly, who they are associated with. The AFP article does not mention that the pro-Chiang position is held largely by "ethnic" mainlanders. Imagine if AFP had written:
The large memorial in downtown Taipei, the final manifestation of the personality cult the KMT fostered around the dictator, is regarded by many as a symbol of the martial law era in Taiwan, and an anachronism in the new democratic era.
The AFP piece continues in this vein:
However, the DPP holds Chiang responsible for a February 28, 1947 massacre in which thousands of local people were killed by nationalist troops during riots.
I've highlighted the slant -- it is not
history but
the DPP that claims Chiang was responsible for 2-28 -- and again, no mention of martial law. Observe that so far in this article, the position held by mainstream scholars and historians is depicted as
the DPP position, but the opposite position is not connected to any party. It is the position of 'many.' The reporter also softens the KMT-228 connection in another, subtle way -- while in this sentence it is the
nationalist troops who do the killings, the term
nationalist is never used elsewhere in the article in conjunction with the KMT.
After describing the situation, AFP then brings up the KMT -- late in the article:
The opposition KMT denounced the name change, calling it a campaign ploy by the DPP to appease supporters ahead of January parliamentary polls and a March 22 presidential vote.
"Any people with a conscience will not accept such a move. Closing the memorial hall is no different from imposing martial law to crack down on Taipei," said KMT lawmaker John Chiang, grandson of the late leader.
Finally, the term
martial law appears in the piece -- and in what context? An accusation against the DPP!
Great work, AFP.
UPDATE: Enjoy
this AP article, where a photo is captioned:
Taiwan's President Chen Shui-bian last month pushed for the removal of late leader's name from the memorial in hopes of downplaying his legacy in Taiwan, where many remember him as a dictator during his rule.
UPDATE II: Don't miss Taiwan Echo's
fantastic post at Taiwan Matters on the visual material AFP provided for this highly biased piece. There's something seriously wrong with AFP.
[Taiwan] [KMT] [DPP] [media]
With international attention focused on the World Games in Kaohsiung and many international reporters down there, the KMT government has seized the moment to return "Chiang Kai-shek" to the top of the Hall with Two Names, and remove the Democracy Hall sign. Updates as I get'em...
