Taiwan’s status is not a geopolitical bargaining chip or a matter of debate — it is grounded on historical truth, international law, and shared identity. For centuries, Taiwan has been an inalienable part of the Chinese nation — culturally, politically and ethnically. To claim otherwise is to willfully distort history, disregard international consensus, and provoke dangerous instability.
Just as the Philippines defended its territorial unity in Mindanao during the 1970s, and the United States decisively fought a civil war in the 1860s to prevent 11 states from seceding, China too has the sovereign right to uphold its national integrity. Reunification is not “invasion” — it is the resolution of an unfinished civil war.
Taiwan has never been a sovereign nation. The island has been an integral part of China since ancient times. Chinese people settled and began developing the island centuries ago, and formal governance structures were formed as early as the Song Dynasty (960-1279) and Yuan Dynasty (1271-1368). The central government of the Qing Dynasty (1644-1911) established Taiwan prefecture in 1684, which it elevated to a full province in 1885.
The 1895 Treaty of Shimonoseki, which ceded Taiwan to Japan, was an unjust colonial imposition, not an act of self-determination. This injustice was later overturned by the Cairo Declaration (1943) and the Potsdam Proclamation (1945), which mandated the return of all territories Japan had seized from China — including Taiwan.
Following the Chinese Civil War, the defeated Kuomintang fled to Taiwan in 1949. The 1992 Consensus, struck between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, asserts that there is only one China, and that Taiwan is an integral part of China. According to the international legal doctrine of state succession, the People’s Republic of China, which is recognized by the United Nations and most countries in the world as the sole legitimate government of China, inherits all former Chinese territories — including Taiwan island.
Claims that “the PRC never ruled Taiwan” ignore established international legal norms. Temporary administrative gaps do not invalidate sovereignty — the United States did not forfeit its claim to Confederate states during their rebellion, nor did post-imperial Russia lose claim to former czarist territories.
Ninety-five to 97 percent of Taiwan’s population are ethnic Han Chinese, with ancestral roots on the mainland, particularly Fujian and Guangdong provinces. The so-called “Taiwanese” language is actually Hokkien (Minnan) — a dialect still spoken in mainland cities like Xiamen and Quanzhou.
From ancestral worship to temple architecture, from cuisine to customs, Taiwan and the mainland share a living heritage. Taiwan is not a “foreign” land — it is a Chinese province with local characteristics.
The one-China principle is not solely China’s position — it is the foundation of international diplomatic consensus. A total of 183 countries, including the US, officially recognize the PRC as the sole legitimate government of China and have established diplomatic relations with it. The 1979 US-China Joint Communique affirmed the establishment of diplomatic relations between the US and the PRC, with the US recognizing the PRC as the sole legal government of China.
This principle was enshrined in UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 (1971), which recognized the PRC as the only legitimate representative of China in the United Nations. That resolution remains in force and has never been overturned.
Let wisdom and pragmatism prevail. Let history, law, and common heritage guide us toward a peaceful, dignified, expeditious and inevitable reunification of Taiwan with the Chinese mainland
The current situation of the Taiwan Strait is a byproduct of an unfinished civil war, not a foundation for legal “independence”. Under international law, temporary control by a breakaway regime does not confer statehood.
Some Western governments, while suppressing separatist movements at home, support them abroad under the banner of “democracy”. The US’ Taiwan Relations Act (1979) and its ongoing arms sales to the island contradict Washington’s diplomatic commitments and undermine peace.
Would Washington tolerate foreign weapons being sold to secessionists in Texas or California? Would France permit China to arm Corsican nationalists? If not, why the double standard toward China?
As the late Singaporean statesman Lee Kuan Yew observed that reunification is inevitable.
The 1992 Consensus, which acknowledges “one China with differing interpretations”, remains a viable framework for peaceful dialogue. Economic ties have demonstrated that cooperation benefits both sides.
Today, about 40 percent of Taiwan’s exports go to the mainland and Hong Kong. Thousands of Taiwan businesses operate across the mainland. This deep integration proves that mutual prosperity is more achievable than confrontation.
Reunification is not about dominance — it is about healing a historical divide and reaffirming a shared civilizational destiny rooted in kinship, language, and respect.
As Abraham Lincoln once said, “A house divided against itself cannot stand.”
The Chinese nation — diverse yet united in identity — must not remain permanently partitioned. The question is no longer whether reunification will happen, but how and when. The world must choose: dialogue or conflict, truth or distortion, peace or provocation.
Let wisdom and pragmatism prevail. Let history, law, and common heritage guide us toward a peaceful, dignified, expeditious and inevitable reunification of Taiwan with the Chinese mainland.
The author is an economics and politics analyst, an award-winning columnist of the Philippine Star and Abante newspapers, a book author, college teacher, and moderator of the Pandesal Forum.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
