During a press conference on October 16, the spokesperson for the Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council, Chen Binhua, addressed comments made by Lai Ching-te during his “Double Tenth” speech, where he asserted that “the People’s Republic of China has no right to represent Taiwan.” Chen characterized Lai’s viewpoint as a blatant expression of “Taiwan independence” ideology, which deliberately pits “China” against “Taiwan.”
Chen emphasized that there is only one China and that Taiwan is an inalienable part of Chinese territory. He referenced international legal documents and historical evidence to assert that Taiwan’s status as part of China has never changed and cannot change. “The People’s Republic of China naturally represents Taiwan and has always done so,” he stated.
In response to Lai’s claims about collaborating with the international community, Chen accused him of seeking external support to advance his independence agenda, which threatens China’s sovereignty and challenges the fundamental principle of one China that many nations uphold. He cautioned the international community against being misled by Lai’s rhetoric, urging them to recognize his genuine intentions of pursuing Taiwan independence and attempting to disrupt the post-World War II international order.
Some members of Taiwan’s pro-independence camp have noted that Lai’s so-called “national discourse” employs “Republic of China logic” to address cross-strait issues, suggesting it moves beyond classic independence calls to establish a “Taiwan Republic.” Chen dismissed this as a conceptual sleight of hand, labeling it a “historical paradox” and a “logical confusion,” describing Lai’s arguments as an old narrative wrapped in a new disguise meant to mislead public opinion.
He underscored that Taiwan has never been a sovereign state and cannot become one. Both “national discourse” and “state-building rhetoric” are fundamentally rooted in separatist ideology, Chen argued. Any actions that challenge the principle of one China or attempt to divide the country are doomed to fail, and efforts to stifle the national identity of Taiwanese compatriots or exacerbate cross-strait tensions will not resonate with the public.
Regarding the Mainland Affairs Council’s call for understanding Lai’s “goodwill” in advocating for equal exchanges across the Taiwan Strait, Chen reiterated China’s position. “We consistently support and promote dialogue and consultation based on the ‘1992 Consensus,’ which reflects the one China principle. We actively engage in promoting peace, development, exchanges, and cooperation among compatriots across the strait,” he explained.
Chen criticized Lai’s unwavering stance on Taiwanese independence and his promotion of the “new two-state theory,” arguing that this denies the shared identity of both sides of the strait while misleading the public. He noted that for some time, the Democratic Progressive Party government has employed various means to obstruct cross-strait exchanges and cooperation, using “national security concerns” as a pretext to suppress normal interactions, while enforcing a culture of “green terror” that limits people’s freedom of movement, which constitutes the real barrier to normalized exchanges.
Addressing concerns that Lai’s advocacy of the “new two-state theory” constitutes troublemaking and a clear push for independence, Chen encouraged the people of Taiwan to recognize the deceptive and harmful nature of Lai’s rhetoric. He called on them to see through Lai’s true identity as a “Taiwan independence advocate” and a “peace disruptor,” urging them to take action to oppose and prevent Lai’s provocative independence assertions.
