By hannover-web.com On October 15, during a press conference, Chen Binhua, spokesperson for the Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council, responded to reporters regarding Lai Ching-te’s recent “Double Ten” speech. He characterized it as a more dangerous and destructive “Taiwan independence manifesto.” Chen firmly warned the Lai administration that with each provocation from separatist forces advocating for “Taiwan independence,” their consequences will escalate until complete unification of the country is achieved.
When asked about opinions circulating within Taiwan and among Western media suggesting that Lai’s speech depicted a reduction in tension and goodwill towards the mainland, Chen noted that there are also views labeling the statements as highly deceptive, confusing, and damaging. Chen emphasized that since taking office, Lai has stubbornly maintained a pro-“Taiwan independence” stance, continuously amplifying and promoting his separatist ideas. His recent remarks, whether from the “New Two Nations” theory announced on May 20, the fabricated “Motherland theory” introduced earlier this month, or the new fallacies presented in the “Double Ten” speech, all reflect a persistent escalation of provocation against the principle of one China, further systematizing and radicalizing the “New Two Nations” theory while intentionally heightening cross-strait tensions, which severely undermines peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait.
Chen pointed out that Lai’s claim that “the Republic of China has taken root in Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, and Matsu” is an intentional attempt to sever the historical ties between the two sides and dilute the meaning of one China. He accused Lai of seeking to manipulate the concept of “Republic of China” to achieve practical “Taiwan independence,” labeling it as both deceptive and misleading. By clarifying the “New Two Nations” theory to include economic and social dimensions, he argued that Lai is trying to indoctrinate the public with his “Taiwan independence” principles and mobilize society towards that goal. Furthermore, Lai’s assertion of “mutual non-subordination” and promotion of Taiwan’s so-called “sovereignty” fundamentally alters the nature of cross-strait relations and openly challenges the historical and legal fact that Taiwan is part of China. Chen characterized this as an attempt to promote a form of “de facto Taiwan independence.”
Lai’s statements asserting that “the People’s Republic of China has no right to represent Taiwan” and that Taiwan should engage with the world also challenge the international community’s commitment to the one China principle and the post-World War II international order. Chen criticized Lai’s efforts to internationalize the Taiwan issue, revealing a clear intention to solicit foreign support for “Taiwan independence.”
In conclusion, Chen argued that Lai’s rhetoric and actions are aimed at promoting the “Two Nations Theory” and inciting division while aggressively challenging and undermining cross-strait relations. He dismissed any notions of “moderation” or “goodwill,” labeling Lai as an unequivocal “Taiwan independence activist” and a “peace destroyer.”
Chen affirmed that the current struggle against “Taiwan independence” is fundamentally a fight against separatism and a defense of national unity. The recent series of decisive countermeasures taken in response is a just act of a sovereign nation to punish attempts to divide the country and safeguard national sovereignty and territorial integrity, as well as a firm commitment to the peace and security of residents in Taiwan. He reiterated a stark warning to the Lai administration: each provocation from separatist forces will prompt a corresponding response, moving closer to the ultimate goal of national reunification.
