方恩格快評》CNN假訊息 誰得利？

示意圖/shutterstock

筆者經常針對外國媒體的錯誤報導和外國學者對臺灣的不正確評論提出意見。隨着11月26日地方選舉和2024年1月總統大選的腳步日近，以及更多外國的「專家」評論臺灣的情勢，預期會有更多類似違反事實的信息出現。

美國有線電視新聞網（CNN）「資深國際記者」威爾·黎普利（Will Ripley）在10月9日發表關於臺灣民主化的視頻報導，就是一個很好的例子。

在報告中，威爾·黎普利走訪了綠島並探討白色恐怖時期的情況。在影片的1分18秒處，威爾·黎普利談到蔣介石：「近半個世紀以來，他以鐵腕統治，肅清政敵，主持審判，親自批示處決數千人。」

蔣介石鐵腕統治臺灣，肅清政敵，這沒有疑義。但威爾·黎普利的其餘陳述確有瑕疵。

中華民國於1945年第二次世界大戰結束時統治了臺灣，1949年中央政府在共產黨擊敗國民黨的中國內戰結束時遷往臺北。蔣介石於1975年去世。這不是「近半個世紀」。如果硬要說「近半個世紀」，就算加上蔣經國統治臺灣的時間，蔣經國在1988年去世，以致兩蔣統治臺灣的時間遠少於「近半個世紀」。

筆者不知道有任何證據能夠證明蔣介石主持了對他的政敵的審判，也許黎普利能夠找到證據吧？

至於「親自批示處決數千人」，白色恐怖綠島紀念園區列出了1061名處決受害者。事實上，有證據表明蔣介石在白色恐怖時期親自批准了一些處決。但是，他批准因爲參加共產黨地下組織而處決的數量，以及他批准因爲參加反獨裁或支持臺獨相關活動而處決的數量，是歷史學家繼續研究的問題。無論如何，黎普利關於蔣介石親自批示處決數千人的說法事實上是不正確的。

關於白色恐怖時期的不正確報導是對實際受害者及其家屬的不尊重。那個時期的白色恐怖事件，釐清所有肇事者的責任包括蔣介石在內，都應該以事實爲依據。政客不應該操弄事實，外國記者也不應該參與這種炒作。

臺灣政客慣於尋求外國記者和外國學者的正面報導，希望內容能起到「出口轉內銷」的效果。蔡英文總統在國慶演說中警告說，「臺灣是信息戰最受攻擊的國家之一，這是一種非傳統安全威脅，持續干擾我們民主制度的運作。」希望即將到來的九合一地方選舉和總統大選，不會導致國內製造的信息戰事件。

CNN’s Inaccurate Report About Taiwan’s White Terror Period: Who Benefits?

By Ross Darrell Feingold

Former Asia Chairman, Republicans Abroad

Twitter: @RossFeingold

This author often opines on the inaccurate content in foreign media reporting, and foreign scholar commentary, about Taiwan. With the local elections upcoming on November 26, and national elections in January 2024, and more foreign “experts” writing about Taiwan, we can expect more of such inaccurate information.

A video report by CNN’s “Senior International Correspondent” Will Ripley about Taiwan’s democratization published on October 9 is a good example.

In the report, Will Ripley visits Green Island and discusses the White Terror Period. At one minute 18 seconds of the video, Will Ripley says about Chiang Kai-shek: "For nearly half a century, he ruled with an iron fist, purging political opponents, presided over their trials, personally ordering thousands of executions".

It is accurate that Chiang Kai-shek ruled Taiwan with an iron fist and purged political opponents.

But the rest of Will Ripley’s statement is flawed.

The Republic of China took control of Taiwan at the end of World War II in 1945, and the central government relocated to Taipei in 1949 at the end of the Chinese civil war in which the Communists defeated the Nationalists. Chiang Kai-shek died in 1975. This is not “nearly half a century”. To approach “nearly half a century” one can add the period Chiang Ching-kuo ruled Taiwan, though Chiang Ching-kuo’s death in 1988 resulted in the period of the Two Chiangs rule in Taiwan being much less than “nearly half a century”.

This author is unaware of any evidence that Chiang Kai-shek presided over the trials of his political opponents. Perhaps Will Ripley can locate the evidence?

As for “personally ordering thousands of executions”, the Green Island White Terror Memorial Park lists 1,061 execution victims. There is in fact evidence Chiang Kai-shek personally approved some of the executions during the White Terror period. However, the number of executions he approved for involvement in Communist Party underground organizations in Taiwan, and the number of executions he approved for involvement in democracy advocacy or Taiwan independence advocacy, is a matter that historians continue to research. Regardless, Will Ripley’s allegation that Chiang Kai-shek personally ordered thousands of executions is factually inaccurate.

Inaccurate reporting about the White Terror period is disrespectful to the actual victims and their families. The terrible events of that period, and the responsibility of the perpetrators including Chiang Kai-shek, should be based on the facts. Politicians should not manipulate the facts, nor should foreign journalists participate in such manipulation.

It is the habit of Taiwan’s politicians to seek favorable reporting by foreign journalists and foreign scholars, in the hope that the content can provide a “If First Sold Overseas, Can Then Re-Sell in Taiwan” effect. President Tsai Ing-wen warned in her National Day speech that “Taiwan is one of the countries most targeted by information warfare, a non-traditional security threat that persistently interferes with the functioning of our democratic system.” Let’s hope that the upcoming local and national elections do not also result in incidents of domestically produced information warfare.

※ 以上言論不代表旺中媒體集團立場※