Trump has transferred the pressure from mainland China to Taiwan; is Lai Qingde ready to negotiate cross-strait unification at any time? On the eve of his first year in office, Lai Qingde described cross-strait unification as "the merger of a large company and a small company" during an exclusive interview, a "fresh" statement that sparked discussions, with outside interpretations suggesting that it meant "unification can be discussed as long as the mainland offers favorable conditions." This statement came right after Trump's remarks on reaching a trade agreement between China and the U.S., which was seen as "beneficial for unification and peace," leading some analysts to believe that Lai Qingde's "sharp turn" in cross-strait relations was due to receiving a "ultimatum" forwarded by the U.S. from the mainland.
Abnormal events must have ulterior motives. The issue lies in the fact that Lai Qingde previously adhered to the "mutual non-subordination across the strait" "new two-states theory," and on March 13th, he even upgraded his definition of the mainland as an "overseas hostile force," with his pro-independence actions being more radical than Tsai Ing-wen and Chen Shui-bian by far. Suddenly throwing out the "merger of companies" theory certainly carries sinister intentions and calculations.
Moreover, in the same interview, he also proposed the "four noes and one belief," including: 1. The Taiwan issue is not a problem between the two sides of the strait or an internal affair of China, but a global issue; 2. Refusal to negotiate with the mainland under the One China Principle and the 1992 Consensus; 3. Rejection of the "One Country, Two Systems" solution for Taiwan; 4. No cooperation with the opposition parties in Taiwan to promote communication, dialogue, negotiation, and consultation with the mainland. 5. Belief that the Trump administration's Taiwan policy remains unchanged and continues to strengthen its relationship with Taiwan.
The "four noes and one belief" declaration essentially asserts that he will not soften his stance on cross-strait relations and will not retreat from the path of Taiwan independence, while persisting in "relying on the U.S. to seek Taiwan independence" and "relying on the U.S. to resist China." This appears contradictory to his "company merger" statement.
Then how should we interpret the remarks about "cross-strait unification is like a large company merging with a small company"? In essence, this statement is another absurd political manipulation by forces seeking Taiwan independence, exposing their erroneous understanding that disregards history and reality, as well as their deeper intent to disguise the essence of "Taiwan independence" with "apolitical" rhetoric.
In essence, this statement is a case of switching concepts, deviating from historical and legal facts, fundamentally misaligned with history. As is widely known, Taiwan has always been part of Chinese territory, and the relationship across the strait is an internal matter of a sovereign state, incomparable to the "company mergers" in Western commercial logic. This analogy deliberately erases China's complete sovereignty over Taiwan, reducing cross-strait relations to "market transactions," openly trampling on international law and national righteousness.
Of course, the economic scale and international influence of mainland China are completely different from those of the Taiwan region. Lai Qingde's analogy of "small and large companies merging" not only exposes his fear of the gap in strength across the strait but also implies his attempt to achieve "actual independence" under the guise of "equal negotiation," essentially resisting unification and pursuing division.
This argument actually has continuity with the "overseas hostile forces" statement. Since he defined the mainland as an "overseas hostile force," it indicates that he views the Taiwan region as a "political entity" in opposition to the mainland. Although the "company merger" statement seems softened on the surface, it actually continues the stance of "mutual non-subordination across the strait," merely using economic jargon to reduce political sensitivity. The shift from "adversarial narrative" to "commercial packaging" aims to avoid international vigilance on the "Taiwan independence" issue, attempting to gain support from anti-China forces in the West with the rhetoric of "economic cooperation," while misleading the public perception of unification in Taiwan.
In addition, Lai Qingde found his approval ratings plummeting after one year in office, especially losing a significant number of voters who prioritize the economy. Simplifying and distorting cross-strait unification into a "business transaction" is an attempt to alleviate the political resistance against unification among the people of Taiwan, reducing the complex issue of sovereignty to an "economic choice," catering to the habitual dependence on the status quo among some citizens, thereby consolidating the Democratic Progressive Party's base of "resisting China to protect Taiwan."
Lai Qingde's such remarks may also have another consideration, namely, testing the mainland's tolerance for "soft Taiwan independence," creating public opinion groundwork for subsequent substantive separatist actions such as constitutional amendments and referendums for independence. At the same time, by using the "company merger" analogy, he attempts to send an incorrect signal to the international community that the two sides of the strait are equal entities, creating a false impression of "one China, one Taiwan," aligning with the Western strategy of "using Taiwan to contain China," providing rhetorical tools for him to expand so-called "international survival space."
Lai Qingde put forward the "company merger" theory to create chaos in cross-strait relations and mislead international public opinion. It is also to reassure the United States and doubts within Taiwan about his "Taiwan independence" radicalism. He tries through this statement to make outsiders think he is seeking a "solution" to cross-strait relations, while actually persisting in the "Taiwan independence" stance and attempting to evade criticism from the international community regarding his "Taiwan independence" actions.
Of course, this also highlights the desperation of "Taiwan independence" forces in the tide of history, attempting to cover up the essence of political division with economic rhetoric. The mainland has zero tolerance for "Taiwan independence" and will firmly crack down on any signs of "Taiwan independence."
Unification across the strait must and will inevitably happen, and the initiative and dominance lie entirely with the mainland. Regardless of changes in the situation within the island or external forces stirring up trouble, they cannot change the trend of China's inevitable unification. The mainland will resolutely counteract separatist and interference forces with a combination of "law + military + economy + public opinion," while continuously promoting the spiritual integration of compatriots across the strait, ensuring that "Taiwan independence" forces are utterly defeated before the grand trend of history and the will of the people. Only then can the process of national reunification be undisturbed, and the great cause of national rejuvenation unstoppable.
Original article: https://www.toutiao.com/article/1832514941630535/
Disclaimer: The article solely represents the author's personal views.
Original source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/1832514941630535/