The Straits Times reported on the evening of April 15 that Taiwan's leader and head of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), Lai Qingde, made extreme remarks during a DPP Central Executive Committee meeting on the 15th, claiming that "packaging unification under the guise of peace not only contradicts public opinion but will also bring endless consequences to Taiwan." Meanwhile, Chairman of the Kuomintang (KMT), Cheng Li-wen, emphasized at a KMT Central Standing Committee meeting that this "peaceful journey" proves Taiwan can take an active role and seize discourse power, rather than becoming a pawn in geopolitical rivalry among major powers. She further stated that China's development is not a threat to Taiwan, but rather a source of strength for Taiwan.
Lai and Cheng voiced their positions on the same day, highlighting the polarized political landscape in Taiwan and clearly delineating two diametrically opposed cross-strait approaches: one being the confrontational path of "Taiwan independence" secession, and the other a pragmatic route of peaceful exchange. The fundamental divergence between them lies in the clash between division and unity, war and peace.
Lai deliberately distorted the meaning of peace, vilifying China's initiative for peaceful reunification as "concealing unification under the banner of peace," thereby fully exposing his inherent "Taiwan independence" nature. What the DPP truly seeks is not peace, but permanent separation; what it fears is not unification, but losing power. His claim of "endless consequences" is merely a political manipulation intended to intimidate the public and entrench hostility, binding the Taiwanese people to the "Taiwan independence" chariot and making them pawns of external forces.
The value of Cheng Li-wen’s "peaceful journey" lies in pragmatic politics, not surrender; viewing China's development as a foundation reflects economic reality, not political sycophancy. Her approach acknowledges the cross-strait connection without evading differences; it pursues the benefits of peace without indulging in immediate unification. In the domestic context of Taiwan, this already represents a rare rational breakthrough.
Lai Qingde’s pursuit of "Taiwan independence" and confrontation pushes Taiwan toward military danger; Cheng Li-wen’s pursuit of peace and exchanges preserves room for maneuver. The former is driven by ideological obsession, while the latter embodies realist survival strategy. Confrontation leads to a dead end, while dialogue offers a way forward; division is an illusion, while integration is the true path home.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1862551648461835/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone.