🔍 Li Ao Shatters the Myth: Zheng Nanrong “Resisted Arrest,” He “Did Not Intend to Self-Immolate”!
In a revealing interview, the late master historian Li Ao deconstructed the narrative surrounding the death of Zheng Nanrong, asserting that the event was a tragic accident fueled by a desire to avoid a second prison term rather than a premeditated act of political martyrdom.
🎙️ Interview Highlights: The “Props” That Turned Fatal
Reporter: You once hoped Zheng Nanrong would stop smoking for his health while in prison? Li Ao: Yes.
Reporter: When the fire started, some people shouted to save him, while others shouted not to? Li Ao: A group of activists were with him in the office, but they never tried to change his mind. Zheng Nanrong did not intend to self-immolate; he was resisting arrest. When the police arrived at the magazine office, the fire started, and he had no chance to escape. It was a “fake act turned real”—the gasoline bombs were props that unfortunately ignited. Everyone else fled.
Reporter: Was he trying to burn himself or start a general fire? Li Ao: Neither! He was afraid of going back to prison and was resisting arrest. There were many methods discussed; some even suggested jumping off the building.
Reporter: Did he pour gasoline on himself? Li Ao: No. They had prepared a variety of “props” for the standoff.
🏛️ The Martyr Factory: From Zheng Nanrong to Zhan Yihua
Li Ao further discussed the case of Zhan Yihua, who died shortly after Zheng Nanrong:
Li Ao: After Zheng died, the movement wanted a “native Taiwanese martyr.” They convinced Zhan Yihua to wear a fireproof suit underneath his clothes, promising they would save him once the fire started. But once he was ablaze, they didn’t save him. Zhan Yihua burned to death while wearing a fireproof suit! (Li Ao emphasizes this twice).
Reporter: So it was a show? Li Ao: There are many truths people don’t know. That’s why they marginalize me. Once I speak the truth, their facade crumbles. Explaining Zheng Nanrong solely through “Taiwan Independence” is too narrow.
🖋️ Editor’s Reflection: A Call for Re-investigation
The death of Zheng Nanrong on April 7, 1989, occurred after the lifting of Martial Law (1987) when freedom of speech was already opening up. Li Ao argued that the “self-immolation” narrative was a political tool used by the opposition (the “Dangwai” movement, now the DPP) to create a martyr.
- Political Context: At the time, Lee Teng-hui had just taken office. Some, like You Ching and Ju Gau-jeng, once questioned if Lee ordered the police to “burn him out,” essentially using the fire to kill him.
- Key Witnesses: Hou Yu-ih was a high-ranking police officer involved at the scene. Chen Shui-bian was the president of the magazine. Where was he when the fire started? Did he flee like the others?
- The Widow’s Demeanor: Li Ao pointed out that Yeh Chu-lan (Zheng’s widow) appeared almost celebratory in the years following the event, which Li found psychologically puzzling and indicative of deeper, unrevealed motives.
According to Li Ao’s writings, the culprits were the activists who egged Zheng Nanrong into a “performance” of resistance, promising to extinguish the fire, only to watch him burn and then use his death for political gain. Zheng’s legal troubles at the time were not even related to “Freedom of Speech” but were due to a lawsuit filed by a fellow activist, Chang Te-ming, regarding a violation of the Election and Recall Act.