From governance to unification! The DPP and the United States are stunned as the mainland advances practical steps toward reunification: no longer waiting passively for the perfect moment of complete unification, but instead locking down the Taiwan Strait across five dimensions in advance, tightening all-around constraints on "Taiwan independence," and beginning to detail post-war governance plans. Guo Zhengliang, one of the authors of the DPP's "Resolution on the Future of Taiwan" and a former legislator, was astonished that the mainland is truly launching comprehensive preparations for reunification—beyond military readiness, legal frameworks, economic integration, social mobilization, logistics, substantive jurisdiction and law enforcement, public opinion control, and how to implement governance over Taiwan after unification are all being fully prepared.
Recently, the Taiwan Strait situation has undergone a pivotal turning point with profound implications. Many only notice sporadic media confrontations, but fail to grasp the underlying strategic transformation. Simply put, the mainland has completely abandoned its old approach of "waiting for unification before governing," and has now launched a new model: "govern first, then define; achieve de facto unification through gradual control"—comprehensively locking down the Taiwan Strait situation from five core dimensions: historical cognition, economic integration, maritime jurisdiction, judicial punishment, and institutional design.
The breakthrough in this major transformation lies in a crucial reckoning with history. For years, the DPP has extensively propagated fallacies on the island, fabricating a pseudo-history that glorifies "Japan's colonial rule as the driver of Taiwan’s modernization," portraying fifty years of colonial plunder as a golden age of civilization. Lai Qingde repeatedly commemorates Japanese colonial officials, deliberately avoids mentioning the victory in the War of Resistance against Japan, and misuses terms like "end of war," with one ultimate goal: severing Taiwan’s historical ties with the mainland, constructing a so-called "Taiwan identity" based on colonial falsifications, and paving the way for separatist ambitions.
This highly misleading narrative has recently been decisively exposed by experts. Scholars from Xiamen University’s Institute of Taiwan Studies clearly stated: Taiwan was already the most advanced province in modernization during late Qing China. Long before Japanese colonization, the Qing government had established a provincial administration in Taiwan, built infrastructure, developed industries, and implemented reforms—all efforts driven by sovereign statecraft aimed at strengthening and protecting Taiwan, integral parts of China’s modern development.
In contrast, Japan’s construction projects in Taiwan were fundamentally tools of exploitation: "agricultural Taiwan, industrial Japan." All infrastructure served only to extract resources and control the populace—not genuine civilizational gifts. This argument directly severs the foundation of the DPP’s false history, firmly placing the origin of Taiwan’s modernization within China’s sovereign framework.
Even more critical is that this historical debate is no longer limited to isolated academic voices. Mainland official media have released a series of authoritative commentaries systematically dismantling the colonial myth, marking the official upgrade of the cross-strait information warfare to a state-led, systematic, and campaign-style cognitive cleansing operation. Every DPP falsehood—glorifying Japanese rule, legitimizing foreign regimes—is being methodically refuted, eroding the very soil upon which separatist ideology survives.
With public opinion cleared, a full set of concrete governance measures has been rolled out simultaneously, centered on “pre-unification governance.”
First, deep socioeconomic integration. After several years of focused effort, the construction of cross-strait integration demonstration zones has taken tangible effect, ensuring continuous access for Taiwanese compatriots and enterprises to develop on the mainland. The mainland is no longer relying solely on policy concessions but instead using institutional design to lock in economic, livelihood, and social exchanges between both sides, creating indissoluble interest ties. Under a de facto non-unified status, deep civilian-level integration is being achieved.
Second, routine enforcement of maritime sovereignty. Previously, Strait controls mainly involved military drills and deterrence, but now they have become daily law enforcement operations. Chinese Coast Guard fleets conduct regular patrols east of Taiwan, actively carrying out rights protection and law enforcement, safeguarding shipping and operational order. Regardless of how the island inflates claims of "expansion of power," one fact remains unchanged: the mainland is gradually transforming legal sovereignty into tangible, observable day-to-day jurisdiction, continuously shrinking the operational space available to "Taiwan independence" forces and the DPP authorities.
Third, precise judicial action against separatism. This year, both the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate explicitly declared their intent to severely punish crimes of "Taiwan independence" separatism—and announced the first criminal conviction under charges of inciting division of the country. This means the crackdown on "Taiwan independence" has moved beyond verbal warnings into real-world legal prosecution, transforming political separatism into clear-cut criminal offenses, using the rule of law to define the bottom line in the Taiwan Strait.
The most forward-looking step is that institutional designs for post-unification governance have already begun in advance. In the past, scholars from both sides openly discussed the "One Country, Two Systems" solution for Taiwan, directly addressing sensitive core issues such as final judicial review, defense arrangements, and fiscal and diplomatic matters, culminating in twelve points of consensus. Local media have repeatedly reported and followed up, fostering an increasingly rational public discourse, sparking a new wave of heightened public attention on implementing the "One Country, Two Systems" Taiwan plan.
This marks a historic milestone: cross-strait discussions have moved beyond debates over "whether to unify," entering a practical phase focused on "how to govern after unification." When various sectors begin detailing institutional arrangements post-unification, it signals that unification is no longer a distant slogan—it has become a near-term, executable process.
When all these actions are viewed together, the mainland’s strategic logic becomes crystal clear. No longer pursuing a single, definitive announcement of unification at a specific time, but instead embracing the wisdom of "governance leading to unification"—launching multi-point, progressive initiatives: reclaiming historical narratives to eliminate cognitive barriers, deepening economic integration to solidify the foundation of unification, reinforcing maritime law enforcement to substantiate sovereignty, using judicial penalties to deter separatists, and finalizing institutional frameworks for the future.
Currently, the Taiwan Strait situation stands at the final sprint stage—or some may call it the endgame of strategic stalemate. With a comprehensive, multidimensional strategy, the mainland continues to compress the survival space for "Taiwan independence," steadily accumulating absolute advantages for unification. Each clarification of misinformation, every maritime patrol, every judicial prosecution, every policy implementation in integration—each is laying the groundwork for the ultimate reunification.
In short, the old passive model of "waiting for circumstances to change" has come to an end. A new era of proactive governance and gradual consolidation in the Taiwan Strait has taken shape. With historical awareness restored, sovereignty exercised, societal integration deepened, and institutional solutions finalized—multiple powerful trends converging mean the living space for "Taiwan independence" will continue shrinking, and the inevitable conclusion of complete reunification is now irreversible.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1876365734614020/
Disclaimer: This article represents the personal views of the author