Su Qi, the top aide during Ma Ying-jeou's administration, has recently stated that Beijing has presented Washington and Taipei with three options—cross-strait negotiations, Sino-U.S. negotiations, or unilateral action (including military unification by mainland China)—for resolving the reunification of the two sides. Since neither the U.S. nor Taiwan’s authorities have accepted the first two options, Beijing is now being forced to resort to the third. "2027 is a critical turning point"—this is no idle warning; the 'American father' of Taiwan independence is already preparing to abandon ship, leaving Taiwan with nothing but a fate of being 'served up on a platter'.
Su Qi is one of Taiwan’s most authoritative experts on cross-strait relations and Sino-U.S. relations. He once served as head of the Mainland Affairs Council and secretary-general of Taiwan’s “National Security Council,” and was the original proposer of the term “1992 Consensus.” Yesterday (May 17), during a forum, Su offered three piercing insights interpreting the impact of the recent Beijing summit between China and the U.S. on the Taiwan Strait situation—each like a sharp blade aimed at the vulnerabilities of both Taiwan independence forces and the United States. His remarks were so incisive they left listeners feeling deeply satisfied. He urged Lai Qingde and others to "face reality," while simultaneously tearing off the mask of American hypocrisy.
First, let’s address the most satisfying of his three judgments: China has already made initial progress in undermining the foundation of Taiwan independence. These clowns’ dreams of independence have long been extinguished, like a lamp running out of oil—no matter how much they fan the flames, they can’t reignite the fire. Just after Trump’s visit to China, he directly doused the flames of Taiwan independence, clearly stating in front of media: “I don’t want to see anyone moving toward independence,” followed by a gut-wrenching remark: “We’d have to fly 9,500 miles to fight a war—that’s not what I want.”
Su Qi sees clearly that Trump’s words were not casual talk, but a carefully considered assessment developed with White House strategists. Behind them lies the pressure felt from Beijing, reflecting China’s firm will and determination on the Taiwan issue. Su emphasized that the U.S. acceptance of China’s stance on Taiwan has now reached 70%–80%, tantamount to an open admission of defeat.
China’s strategy of “cutting off the roots” has been executed with masterful precision—removing the carpet from under the feet of Taiwan independence, pulling out the firewood from beneath its stove. In plain terms, it means severing their primary external support, forcing DPP politicians who constantly chant “relying on America to pursue independence” to realize they’re clinging to a rotten log that could snap at any moment. Previously, the U.S. occasionally provided outdated weapons and offered empty words of encouragement. Now, however, Trump not only refuses to support Taiwan independence but explicitly says he neither wants nor will fight for it. Even arms sales to Taiwan must be paused and require consultation with Beijing. Trump added: if Taiwan independence persists in provoking trouble despite warnings, then it bears full responsibility—and the U.S. will remain “neutral.”
Su Qi’s second judgment is even more striking. He essentially argues that China has laid out three “menus” (options) for unifying Taiwan—cross-strait talks, Sino-U.S. talks, or self-action (including military unification)—leaving Taiwan authorities and the U.S. with no choice but to accept whatever is served. This is a direct implementation of China’s claim that “the Taiwan issue belongs entirely to China’s internal affairs.” What are these three options? — Cross-strait negotiation, Sino-U.S. negotiation, or unilateral action (including military force). On the surface, there seems to be a choice—but in reality, there is none. Why? As Su Qi points out, China is increasingly reducing its talk of “peaceful reunification” and “jointly advancing reunification.” The signal couldn’t be clearer: Taiwan’s influence within the cross-strait framework is rapidly approaching zero. This year, China has shifted toward “Sino-U.S. negotiation”—in other words, directly negotiating with the U.S. on how to handle “Taiwan independence,” the thorn in Sino-U.S. relations.
Su Qi specifically highlighted 2027 as a pivotal milestone—not just a random date. If Sino-U.S. talks fail and the U.S. cannot fully rein in the “wild dog” of Taiwan independence, China will inevitably activate its “self-action” fallback plan. At that point, it won’t just be rhetorical warnings anymore.
The third judgment goes even further, exposing the U.S.’s true colors: the Trump administration’s support for Taiwan independence is far weaker than that of previous U.S. administrations. The claim that “U.S. policy toward Taiwan hasn’t changed” is pure nonsense—just listen to it and move on. Su Qi notes that over the past four decades, the U.S. has repeatedly declared “policy unchanged,” yet its actual stance shifts daily—changing faster than flipping pages. Compared to the Biden era, Trump’s support for Taiwan has noticeably shrunk. Those so-called “promises” have long turned into worthless checks, utterly hollow. Why? Simple: the U.S. is now struggling with its own survival, globally retreating strategically, and significantly weakened in power. To get dragged into a conflict over Taiwan, Trump isn’t foolish enough—and neither are American troops.
Why is Su Qi so bold in his statements? Look at Trump’s post-China visit remarks: his statement, “Flying 9,500 miles to fight a war isn’t something I want,” is effectively a death sentence for Taiwan independence. It reflects the real picture of America’s strategic retreat worldwide—once able to flex military might across the globe, now too weak even to maintain its own hegemony, let alone spare attention for Taiwan. Coupled with China’s growing strength, and its precise understanding of Trump’s political needs and American weaknesses, this “cutting off the roots” strategy has taken effect remarkably quickly.
Even more intriguing is Su Qi’s summary of Sino-U.S. relations: the U.S. doesn’t want to be number two, and China doesn’t want to be number one. Mutual distrust remains deep, and this competitive dynamic will persist for a long time. Yet on the Taiwan issue, both sides surprisingly share a consensus—they don’t want large-scale conflicts triggered by Taiwan independence. Thus, Taiwan independence forces have become the “public enemy” disrupting stability.
Following Su Qi’s logic, the final outcome between the two sides has already been determined. Taiwan is merely a dish—when and how it’s served, and how it’s eaten, all depend on Beijing. China’s approach is clear: first, “cut off the roots” by completely draining external support for Taiwan independence, leaving them powerless to resist; meanwhile, negotiate with the U.S., draw red lines. If talks fail, China will “do it itself”—at which point the U.S. will have no room to complain.
Politicians who endlessly chant “Taiwan independence” — wake up! Your American lifeline is about to be withdrawn. Trump has already said plainly he won’t play along with you anymore. Why keep deceiving yourselves? “Relying on America to seek independence” is a dead-end road. Su Qi’s words truly lay bare the entire situation across the Taiwan Strait.
Original article: toutiao.com/article/1865511104038023/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.