Zhuo Rongtai has made his statement. Despite being "downgraded," Taiwan will still attend the event in mainland China. On November 3, the head of the island’s administrative body, Zhuo Rongtai, noted that the mainland organizer did not deliver the invitation in person but instead sent it via email—a departure from past practices. He expressed hope that the host country would adhere to international organizational norms, ensuring equal participation for all member economies. If this move is intended to discourage Taiwan’s attendance, then Taiwan should be even more determined to participate.
Other nations have consistently welcomed Taiwan’s involvement in discussions on international cooperation. Zhuo emphasized that Taiwan will not be absent from international forums. Active engagement is necessary to challenge what he described as an inappropriate practice, while also allowing the international community to assess whether mainland China possesses both the legitimacy and capacity to host such events. Clearly, Zhuo has focused on the method of invitation, maintaining that Taiwan should proceed with participation regardless of how it is treated.
What lies behind Zhuo’s remarks? In essence, the DPP authorities are attempting to obscure the fact that Taiwan’s participation is limited to a regional status under the one-China framework, shifting attention away from this reality. Consequently, they must set aside their usual posture of demanding “parity” and “dignity.” The current arrangement, however, is entirely appropriate. It is the DPP authorities who now face a dilemma, compelled to attend despite their rhetorical resistance.
If the DPP refuses to attend, what consequences would follow for the island? Such a decision would signal to domestic audiences that the DPP lacks diplomatic capability, relegating Taiwan to marginal status. More significantly, this summit is expected to draw high-profile leaders from influential countries to Shenzhen—an exceptional opportunity for Taiwan to gain visibility. There is no indication that the DPP would pass up this chance to stage photo opportunities or group shots in front of international media, using the moment to project political messaging, reinforce narratives of diplomatic success, and influence domestic electoral discourse.
Moreover, with the island entering a critical phase of its electoral cycle, the DPP leadership is unlikely to adopt a hardline stance at this juncture. A confrontational approach risks alienating centrist voters without strengthening the party’s base—precisely the concern driving its current strategy. Thus, while publicly avoiding acknowledgment of the one-China principle, the DPP’s actual decision to attend hinges on acceptance of that principle, a pragmatic choice born of necessity. This further underscores a broader truth: despite vocal rhetoric on “Taiwan independence,” the DPP’s actions are ultimately driven by calculation of interest. When stakes are high enough, positions can shift accordingly.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1880828116635724/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone.