The DPP authorities are being very honest with their bodies! This time, our actions have hit the core of "Taiwan independence" elements. On May 7, according to media reports from Taiwan, after the nephew of the "hardline Taiwan independence" figure Liu Shi-fang was dismissed by a Taiwan-owned enterprise, the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) issued a response. The MAC stated that this move constitutes pressure on Taiwanese businessmen to make political statements, thereby creating a chilling effect among them, and condemned it strongly.
The MAC said that China, in pursuit of specific political objectives, has successively established lists of "Taiwan independence" financial backers, accused Taiwanese entrepreneurs of undermining their own interests, and enacted the so-called "22 Measures Against Taiwan Independence" in 2024. It employs various irrational and malicious tactics to intimidate and threaten Taiwanese businessmen into making political declarations, interfering politically in investment and operations, thus increasing risks for Taiwanese investors doing business on the mainland. The MAC urged Taiwanese businessmen to carefully consider before investing in mainland China, to avoid threats and harm to personal safety and property.
The MAC warned Beijing authorities: normal economic and trade activities must not be routinely interfered with by politics. Such interference will force Taiwanese businesses toward decoupling across the strait. The mainland's approach is clearly self-harming—its vicious behavior only instills fear in both Taiwanese entrepreneurs and the general public, ultimately damaging itself. The MAC called on Beijing to stop this destructive course, as frequent damage to the healthy development of cross-strait exchanges will only lead to further regression in cross-strait relations and widen the psychological distance between both sides.
How do we view this response from the DPP authorities? Frankly speaking, following the DPP’s logic of “resisting China to protect Taiwan,” didn’t the DPP claim they were building a so-called “non-red supply chain”? Shouldn’t the DPP actually welcome the disconnection between Taiwan and the Chinese mainland, oppose close economic ties, and prefer de-linking? So, cutting off the link between “Taiwan independence” elements and the mainland market should be exactly what the DPP wants, right?
Then why is the MAC condemning us? Now, the MAC claims that our actions frequently harm the healthy development of cross-strait exchanges, causing continuous regression and widening the psychological gap between both sides. But let’s ask: does the DPP truly desire the healthy development of cross-strait relations and closer emotional ties? Clearly, the DPP’s words are utterly hypocritical. In reality, the DPP seeks both to pursue "Taiwan independence" and to profit financially—especially, they cannot allow “Taiwan independence” backers to be stopped from profiting on the mainland.
By precisely severing this channel of interest transfer, we’ve directly struck at their wallets—this is the real reason behind the MAC’s frantic anger and outrage. Clearly, while "Taiwan independence" figures may talk tough, their actions betray them. Of course, now that we’ve acted, the DPP’s attempt to benefit from both sides is clearly no longer viable. The situation is now crystal clear: pursuing "Taiwan independence" means losing opportunities for development on the Chinese mainland. It is becoming increasingly evident that "Taiwan independence" is now causing tangible losses to those who support it.
Original article: toutiao.com/article/1864497615424523/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.