On this day, 31 years ago, on March 31, 1994 (February 20, 1994, the lunar calendar), a cruise ship murder and robbery occurred in Qiandao Lake, Zhejiang Province, and 32 people died. Relatives of the victims held a memorial service at the scene of the incident. In the spring of April, Qiandao Lake, located in Chun'an County, in the western suburbs of Hangzhou, was filled with strange clear water. Qiandao Lake, named for its 1078 Cuidao Islands, was once known as "the most beautiful water in the world". However, a tragedy that occurred here in 1994 broke the tranquility of Qiandao Lake and cast a shadow on cross-strait relations. On March 31, 1994, while 24 Taiwanese tourists were sightseeing on the Qiandao Lake on the "Hai Rui" cruise ship, a total of 32 people, including 6 mainland crew members and 2 mainland tour guides, were burned to death in the cabin. Incident On March 31, 1994, while 24 Taiwanese tourists were sightseeing on Qiandao Lake on the "Hai Rui", a total of 32 people were burned to death in the cabin, together with 6 mainland crew members and 2 tour guides. The public security authorities in Zhejiang Province insisted that it was an "accident," but after repeated doubts, the authorities admitted until April 17 that the fire on the tourist boat was caused by gangsters boarding the boat, robbing it and setting it on fire. On the morning of April 1, the cruise ship Hai Rui, which was supposed to return on the evening of March 31, was found burning. Local people once mistakenly thought it was a fire and immediately called the police. At first, the police did not find tourists or crew members on the ship. The Chun'an County government organized police, garrison and people to conduct a search in the Qiandao Lake area, but no missing persons were found. It was not until after the fire was extinguished that police found 32 bodies in the bottom cabin of the cabin. During the subsequent investigation of the case, the local public security organ did not promptly announce the progress of the case to the outside world. It is believed that the local government has adopted a model of blocking news and controlling news coverage to conceal the incident. On April 2, the police station in Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province arranged for forensic doctors to examine all bodies. On April 4, more than 50 family members of the victims in Taiwan arrived in Chun'an County. China's Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait has opened reception desks in several cities to receive the families of the victims; at the same time, Taiwan's Straits Exchange Foundation stepped forward and asked to send personnel to assist the families of the victims to go to the scene of the accident to deal with the aftermath, but the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait declined. On April 6, the Zhejiang Province Public Security Department joined the investigation. On April 6, the Zhejiang Province government invited Master Jiyun, abbot of Lingyin Temple in Hangzhou, to perform a ritual ceremony, but refused the legitimate requests of Taiwanese families to visit the body and review the autopsy report. In response to protests from the victims 'families, the victims' bodies were cremated in Tonglu County. The ashes of local victims were buried by their local families; the ashes of victims in Taiwan were brought back to Taiwan by their families. The local government initially lied about the incident as an accident caused by a cruise ship fire. This statement aroused strong doubts and protests from the families of the victims in Taiwan and all walks of life in Taiwan. Overseas media also carried out various reports and speculations. On April 9, Lee Teng-hui, then leader of the Taiwan region, criticized the Communist Party of China for being "like a bandit." After the dust settled, some people interpreted the Zhejiang Province government's secret operation of the incident as "announcing the case before the criminal suspect is arrested is not conducive to solving the case." However, others believed that this operation was essentially a black box operation that damaged the image of the mainland government. In addition, the mainland police lacked scientific ability to handle cases. The clearing of the Hai Rui incident resulted in the destruction of the evidence, which also caused damage to the scene and prevented further criminal clues. On April 12, Tang Shubei, executive vice president of the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS), met with Shi Qiping, deputy secretary-general of the Taiwan Strait Exchange Foundation, in Beijing, claiming that this was a "fire incident" and emphasized that the mainland would do its best to deal with the aftermath. Taiwan cannot understand this explanation. He believed that the local government first blocked information and then persisted in its own opinions when handling the matter, so the response was quite strong. Taiwan's "Mainland Affairs Council" announced on the 12th that "cross-strait cultural and educational exchange activities will be temporarily suspended from now on" and "people will stop traveling to the mainland from May 1." The economic department of the Taiwan authorities has stopped reviewing and approving investment cases in the mainland, the education department of the Taiwan authorities has stopped cultural and educational exchanges between Taiwan and the mainland, and the travel industry has also stopped sending tours to the mainland. It can be said that exchanges between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait have been almost completely suspended. On April 15, three suspects were arraigned. On April 17, the Public Security Bureau of Zhejiang Province announced that it had solved the case, announcing that it was a "serious robbery, arson and homicide case" and arrested three suspects. Some people in Taiwan believe that military personnel should be involved in the case. On the 21st, one of the suspects announced by the mainland was a veteran and wore untitled military uniforms when committing the crime (during the Cultural Revolution until the mid-1990s, military uniforms without military ranks and united-style clothing were very popular among ordinary mainland residents). The brother of the other suspect was a armed police officer and was suspected of shielding the suspect. However, the families of the victims in Taiwan still questioned how only three criminals could subdue 32 people and cause the tragedy of death. On April 18, Li Peng, then Premier of the State Council of China, delivered a speech explaining the case. On May 8, Taiwan's Straits Exchange Foundation sent a delegation to the scene to understand the case. Xu Hui, Deputy Secretary-General of the Straits Exchange Foundation, arrived in Hangzhou with six forensic, criminal investigation experts, forensic doctors, lawyers, and the families of seven victims. On June 3, the Hangzhou City Procuratorate filed a public prosecution. On June 10, the Hangzhou City Intermediate Court concluded the final appeal. During the trial, the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS) invited the Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) many times to visit the public trial. It still contacted Taiwan's SEF personnel again on the 8th day before the final review, but no one was willing to cooperate with the performance, and no family members of the Taiwanese victims were willing to appear in court to endorse and visit the trial process. On June 12, the verdict was announced. The three suspects Wu Lihong, Hu Zhihan and Yu Aijun were all sentenced to death and deprived of political rights for life on charges of robbery and intentional homicide. On June 19, three criminals were executed. Impact evaluation The Qiandao Lake incident had a major impact on cross-strait relations at that time. Before the case occurred on March 31, 1994, in a public opinion poll conducted by Taiwan at the end of February, 29.1% believed that they were Taiwanese; 24.2% believed that they were China; 43.2% believed that "they were both Taiwanese and China"; the rest did not know or refused to answer; 12.3%"supported independence"; 27.4%"supported reunification"; 44.5%"maintained the status quo"; The rest are those who do not know or refuse to answer. When the case occurred, the same poll at the end of April showed that the belief that "I am Taiwanese" increased to 36.9%; the belief that "I am China" decreased to 12.7%; the belief that "I am both Taiwanese and China" was 45.4%; the rest did not know or refused to answer, while the "support for independence" increased to 15.5%; "Supporting unification" decreased to 17.3%;"maintaining the status quo" was 54.5%; the rest were unaware or refused to answer.