Musha Incident
Musha Incident | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A photo taken by the Japanese authorities in the aftermath of the Incident | |||||||
| |||||||
Belligerents | |||||||
Tkdaya[1] |
Truku[1] (Taroko) | ||||||
Commanders and leaders | |||||||
Mona Rudao | Ishizuka Eizō | ||||||
Strength | |||||||
~1,200 | ~2,000 | ||||||
Casualties and losses | |||||||
644 killed[1] |
27 October:
|
The Musha Incident (Chinese and Japanese: 霧社事件; pinyin: Wùshè Shìjiàn; Wade–Giles: Wu4-she4 Shih4-chien4; rōmaji: Musha Jiken; Pe̍h-ōe-jī: Bū-siā Sū-kiāⁿ), also known as the Wushe Rebellion and several other similar names, began in October 1930 and was the last major uprising against colonial Japanese forces in Japanese Taiwan. In response to long-term oppression by Japanese authorities, the Seediq indigenous group in the settlement of Musha (Wushe) attacked a Japanese village, killing over 130 Japanese. In response, the Japanese led a relentless counter-attack, killing over 600 Seediq in retaliation. The handling of the incident by the Japanese authorities was strongly criticised,[by whom?] leading to many changes in Aboriginal policy.
Background
Previous armed resistance to Japanese imperial authority had been dealt with harshly, as demonstrated by responses to previous uprisings, such as the
However, a different approach was used in order to control Taiwan's indigenous peoples. The indigenous peoples of Formosa Island were still designated as seiban (生蕃, "raw barbarians" or "wild tribespeople"), and treated as inferiors, rather than as equal subjects. Tribes were "tamed" through "assimilation", the process of disarming traditional hunting tribes and forcing them to relocate to the plains and lead an agrarian existence. Further resistance was then dealt with by military campaigns, isolation and containment.[4] In order to access natural resources in mountainous and forested indigenous-controlled areas, Governor-General Sakuma Samata adopted a more aggressive terrain policy, attempting to pacify or eradicate aboriginal groups in areas scheduled for logging within five years' time; by 1915, this policy had been largely successful, although resistance still existed in the more remote areas.[5]
Proximal causes
The Seediq people in the vicinity of Musha village had been considered by the Japanese authorities to be one of the most successful examples of this "taming" approach, with
In the days immediately prior to the incident, Chief Mona Rudao held a traditional wedding banquet for his son, Daho Mona, during which animals were slaughtered and wine was prepared and drunk. A Japanese police officer named Katsuhiko Yoshimura was on patrol in the area, and was offered a cup of wine by Daho Mona as a symbolic gesture. The officer refused, saying that Daho Mona's hands were soiled with blood from the slaughtered animals. Daho Mona attempted to take hold of the officer, insisting he participate, and the officer struck him with his stick. Fighting ensued, and the officer was injured. Mona Rudao attempted to apologize by presenting a flagon of wine at the officer's house, but was turned away.[7] The simmering resentment among the Seediq in Musha was finally pushed to the limit.
Incident
On 27 October 1930, hundreds of Japanese converged on Musha for an athletics meet at the elementary school. Shortly before dawn,
Consequences
The Japanese authorities responded with unprecedentedly harsh military action. A press blackout was enforced, and Governor General Ishizuka Eizō ordered a counter-offensive of two thousand troops to be sent to Musha, forcing the Seediq to retreat into the mountains and carry out guerrilla attacks by night. Unable to root out the Seediq despite their superior numbers and greater firepower, the Japanese faced a political need for a faster solution. Consequently, Japan's army air corps in Taiwan ordered bombing runs over Musha to smoke out the rebels, dropping mustard gas bombs in what was allegedly the first such use of chemical warfare in Asia.[12][7][14] The uprising was swiftly quelled, with any remaining resistance suppressed by the third week of December 1930;[7] Mona Rudao had committed suicide on November 28, but the uprising had continued under other leaders.[15] Of the 1,200 Seediq directly involved in the uprising, 644 died, 290 of whom committed suicide to avoid dishonour.[citation needed]
Due to internal and external criticism of their handling of the incident, Ishizuka and Hitomi Jirō, his chief civil administrator, were forced to resign in January 1931. However, Ishizuka's replacement,
The uprising did effect a change in the authorities' attitudes and approaches towards aboriginals in Taiwan. Musha had been regarded as the most "enlightened and compliant" of the aboriginal territories, and the colonial power's inability to prevent the massacre provoked a fear of similar nationalist movements starting in Taiwan, Korea, and Japan itself.[16] A change in policy was clearly needed. Ching suggests that the institution of empire-building (kominka 皇民化) became the dominant expression of colonial control: aboriginals came to be seen as imperial subjects on equal footing with other ethnic groups in Taiwan, and were upgraded in status from "raw savages" to takasagozoku (高砂族, "tribal peoples of Taiwan"). Japanization education was intensified, promoting Japanese culture and fealty to the emperor in the younger generation.[citation needed]
During the Musha Incident, the Seediq under Mona Rudao revolted against the Japanese, while the Truku and Toda did not. The rivalry of the Seediq with the Toda and Truku was aggravated by the Musha Incident, given that the Japanese had long played them off against each other. Following the incident,Seediq land was ceded to the Truku and Toda by the Japanese.[citation needed]
In the media
The Musha Incident has been depicted three times in movies, in 1957 in the Chinese film Qing Shan bi xue (青山碧血),
The Chinese novel Remains of Life (originally published in Chinese in 1999, published in English translation in 2017) is a fictionalized account of the aftermath of this incident.[18]
See also
References
- ^ a b c d "Wushe Incident - Encyclopedia of Taiwan". Archived from the original on 25 March 2014. Retrieved 23 November 2012.
- ISBN 9780801488054.
- ISBN 9780765614940.
- ^ Roy (2003), p. 49.
- ^ a b c Roy (2003), p. 51.
- ISBN 9788886583800.
- ^ a b c "The Wushe Incident". The Takao Club. Retrieved 21 September 2011.
- ^ "Wushe Incident". Encyclopedia of Taiwan. 11 Mar 2014. Archived from the original on 25 March 2014.
- ^ Hung (2000), p. 222.
- ISBN 978-4062689229
- .
- ^ Eric Croddy, "China's Role in the Chemical and Biological Disarmament Regimes", The Nonproliferation Review Spring 2002: 16, <http://cns.miis.edu/npr/pdfs/91crod.pdf>, accessed 24 September 2011, p. 17.
- ISBN 4-16-358560-5.
- ^ Meitetsu Haruyama says that instead of mustard gas, hundreds of rounds of tear gas and at least three rounds of a special gas (a combination of cyanide and tear gas) were used. However, it is unclear whether it had any effect or not.[13]
- ^ Hung (2000), p. 223.
- .
- ISBN 9780810879225.
- ^ Wu He (2017). Remains of Life: A Novel. Translated by Michael Berry. New York: Columbia University Press.
ISBN 9780231166010.
Further reading
- Han Cheung (23 October 2016). "Taiwan in Time: The long road to retaliation". Taipei Times.
- Han Cheung (25 October 2020). "Taiwan in Time: Confusion and tears' of an ill-fated clan". Taipei Times.
- Han Cheung (30 October 2016). "Taiwan in Time: Fighting for the oppressor". Taipei Times.