대만의 2·28 轉型正義와 역사 교과서 서술

Abstract

National agenda, Ethnic Group agenda, and Democratic agenda are intertwined in 2.28‘s Transitional Justice. 2.28 started with Taiwanese resistance to the undemocratic KMT regime. In the 1990s, in the process of democratization and transitional justice, there were conflicting views of the core nature of the case as the Chinese vs. Taiwanese conflict (national agenda), Native Taiwanese vs. Waishengren conflict (ethnic agenda), and the dictator vs. people conflict (democratic agenda). From 1992, KMT government carried out a fact󰠏finding investigation for 2.28, the president’s official apology, building the memorial monument, and compensation for victims. But the situation in which there were “victims but no perpetrators” occurred in the fact󰠏finding investigation. Following the promotion of 2.28 Transitional Justice, there were also changes in the description of high school History Textbook. State󰠏designated textbooks published under the KMT government until 1995 had a state󰠏led character that reduced the truth of the case and addressed the positive role of KMT. However, as authorized Textbook have been published since 2000, those Textbooks have reflected the result of the promotion of 2.28 Transitional Justice, and thereby the descriptions based on facts were made in Textbook and it has laid the foundation to get to the bottom of the case. There were two issues in the Textbook description: One is whether to view the cause of the incident as a national issue, an ethnic issue, or a democratic issue. The other is how to deal with the responsibility of Chiang Kai󰠏shek and KMT. In the former case, the emphasis differs depending on each period, each Textbook, and each perspective on the characterization of 2.28. In the latter case, none of the Textbook I have reviewed deals with the issue of Chiang Kai󰠏shek‘s responsibility, so Transitional Justice, which has ‘victim but no perpetrator’, is reflected in the textbook description.