Recently, the island politician, the Kuomintang Central Committee Review Committee member Zhang Yazhong , and former deputy leader of Taiwan, Lu Xiulien, put forward the idea of replacing "cross-strait unification" with "cross-strait unification". In this regard, the Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council 2 specifically responded to the above statement at a press conference a few days ago.
Spoke Taiwan Affairs Office spokesman Ma Xiaoguang pointed out that national reunification must be based on the legal principles and reality that "the two sides of the Taiwan Strait belong to the same country, and China's sovereignty and territorial integrity have never been divided and cannot be divided". Peaceful reunification is in line with the fundamental interests of compatriots on both sides of the strait and the Chinese nation. We hope that compatriots on both sides of the strait will firmly oppose "Taiwan independence" and promote the process of national reunification.
Although the Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council did not mention the expression of "cross-strait integration", it actually used "I hope that compatriots on both sides of the strait will promote the reunification of the motherland", which showed the mainland's clear position on this proposition, and it can be said that it is very firm in its unacceptable attitude.
In fact, the so-called concept of "cross-strait integration" is not new. There have been similar opinions on the island a long time ago, and another statement that is similar to it is the concept of "China Federation" or "China Federation" that Lu Xiulian once advocated.
On the surface, the statements of "cross-strait integration" and "China Federation of China ( Confederacy )" seem to play a role in solving the problem of national reunification, but if it is copied and copied on the Taiwan issue, it is actually a distorted theory, which is neither in line with the overall interests of the Chinese nation nor fundamentally improves cross-strait relations.
On the one hand, the core arguments of the "cross-strait integration" and "Federal (Confederacy)" are "recognizing that the two sides of the Taiwan Strait belong to the same country and do partial integration through common interests". In a more popular way, it is to advocate that the two sides of the Taiwan Strait are "unified but not unified, divided but not independent."
On the other hand, the meaning of "unification" and "unification" are very different. The former refers to the unification of multiple regimes or regions under one sovereignty. The simplest example is that Qin Shihuang unifies the six countries and completes the first unified on Chinese history .
"integration" refers to the alliance of multiple countries or regions under different sovereignty, such as , EU , and 15 franchise republics, .
In other words, the primary premise of "integration" is that the mainland needs to first accept that Taiwan is a "sovereign state" or agree with the "two-state theory" advocated by the separatist forces of "Taiwan independence". This is obviously a complete fallacy.
We are very clear that Taiwan issue is a legacy of civil war . Although the separation of cross-straits has been achieved for decades, China's sovereignty has never been divided. Taiwan Island has been a part of China from beginning to end. So the so-called replacement of "unification" with "unification" is nonsense with ulterior motives, which is a complete "independence". In addition to being untenable in theory and legal theory, "integration theory" and "federalism" are also completely unfeasible in the practice! It should be known that the result of unification must be to promote the two sides of the Taiwan Strait toward a higher degree of integration, but integration may not necessarily promote the two sides toward a higher degree of integration, but may be a more severe division.
The reason is that development is always dynamic. There will inevitably be a dispute over discourse under "cross-strait integration", which will only aggravate the division and cause a more serious relationship crisis to the two sides of the Taiwan Strait.
bluntly stated that in the so-called "unification" state, the Taiwan authorities will get a part of the initiative in cross-strait relations from the mainland. Their advance can promote cross-strait reunification, retreat can continue to be separatist, and even skip the "Taiwan independence" process and directly declare "Taiwan independence".
In addition, judging from the development of the EU, integration has indeed made Europe highly integrated in various fields, but the disadvantages brought about are gradually emerging. The most representative of them is that they are always unable to speak with a voice, and that member states will be innocently affected by the so-called "common values".
Since the Russian-Ukraine War, the EU has repeatedly sanctioned Russia, but countries represented by Hungary opposed the implementation of sanctions. As a result, even member states that do not support sanctions against Russia were forced to be countered by Russia under the "kidnapping" of "common values".
It is obvious that "integration" still has irreconcilable disadvantages in the practice process and must not be used as a solution to the Taiwan issue, otherwise it will only bring endless troubles to the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation and the country.
At this point, we can see clearly the essence of Zhang Yazhong and Lu Xiulian. They did not sincerely make suggestions for the reunification of the motherland, but to continue to keep Taiwan in a state of separatism for a long time, so that political forces such as the Kuomintang and the Democratic Progressive Party will continue to cause harm to the other side on the island.
As an ancient nation that had inherited the idea of "great unification" more than two thousand years ago, we must never forget the positive role of unification on national development. The 1.4 billion Chinese people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait must work together for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the motherland. If someone must engage in "Taiwan independence" under various guises, the People's Liberation Army's iron fist will definitely be ruthless.
