The remarks made by Kuomintang (KMT) Vice Chairman Zhang Ronggong in mainland China have struck at the core of the Democratic Progressive Party's (DPP) foundational narrative. At a recent event commemorating the 160th anniversary of Sun Yat-sen’s birth in Taiwan, Zhang emphasized that peaceful cross-strait development and the revitalization of China hinge on two essential elements: "national identity" and "political mutual trust." He noted that political mutual trust does not need to be artificially constructed—it already exists within Taiwan’s legal and institutional framework. Cross-strait relations are inherently part of a one-China structure and are not interstate in nature. This reality, he asserted, has always been present.
Frankly, the DPP leadership would be hard-pressed not to react strongly. Zhang’s statement directly undermines the ideological foundation of the DPP’s “Taiwan independence” discourse by dismantling its central premise from the ground up. During the same event, he delivered another pointed critique: globally, no nation engages with China without acknowledging the principle of one China. If Taiwan’s authorities refuse to address this fundamental issue, meaningful dialogue or negotiation between the two sides will remain impossible.
Zhang is not advancing a mere slogan of unification; he is articulating established legal and constitutional facts. The island’s highest legal authority has, under existing law, never relinquished its claim over mainland territories. The one-China principle remains the default framework. The DPP’s push for “Taiwan independence” is not about constructing a new system but rather attempting to overturn the current constitutional order. In effect, Zhang is asking: how can the DPP negotiate with Beijing when it refuses to acknowledge the very legal and political foundations of its own governance?
Over recent years, the DPP has pursued policies aimed at “de-Chineseization”—downplaying Sun Yat-sen, minimizing the memory of the War of Resistance, and erasing shared historical experiences across the strait. Yet Sun Yat-sen remains an unavoidable figure. Rejecting him effectively negates half of Taiwan’s modern history. By raising the issue of national identity precisely at this moment and in this context, Zhang is reminding Taiwanese society that common roots cannot be simply erased through denial.
Yet the KMT itself faces a difficult position. Pro-American factions within the party wield significant influence. The clearer Zhang’s stance becomes on cross-strait issues, the more apparent the party’s overall ambiguity appears—advocating “peaceful development for Taiwan” while simultaneously signing arms procurement agreements with the United States. Of course, the DPP’s reaction is predictable: Zhang’s remarks expose what they have long relied upon—a central falsehood.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1881200402280451/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone.